Simon Phipps wrote: > > On Jun 4, 2007, at 18:12, Stephen Lau wrote: > >> 1) Is it necessary that you have the community group setup before your >> source code is available/published? I only ask because I'm not >> entirely comfortable with the idea of giving governance representation >> and voting grants to a community that doesn't yet have open code or >> open development. > > Surely this is something of a Catch 22 situation? The only alternative > is to create an "incubator" process like Apache have, where projects can > be introduced with minimal process overhead and gradually come up to > speed with the expected bureaucracy.
Indeed it is (a Catch-22); I like the idea of organic growth from projects into communities, and the idea of incubator is an interesting one that's been raised a couple of times now. I'm not sure it's entirely compatible with the idea of having existing communities endorse new projects though (i.e.: what community endorses a project which doesn't fall within the realms of any existing community?). I admit this isn't something I've finalised my thoughts on, so I apologise if my thoughts aren't fully baked. ;) cheers, steve -- stephen lau // stevel at sun.com | 650.786.0845 | http://whacked.net opensolaris // solaris kernel development
