On Jun 4, 2007, at 19:11, Stephen Lau wrote: > 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?).
At the risk of errors of details (Roy is the expert on this), if we had an OpenSolaris Incubator it would be an Incubator Community that could be the home to projects of any description (that were not naturally a fit elsewhere, obviously) while they gained full peer status with other OpenSolaris communities. At the point at which they were sufficiently mature, they would be accorded Community status in their own right. S.
