On Tue 11 Aug 2009 04:06, Upayavira wrote:
> There are two reasons why it is more heavyweight: because we haven't
> spent huge amounts of time/money automating our infrastructure and
> putting it behind a pretty web UI, but more importantly because we pay
> more attention to the legals, ensuring
On Aug 10, 2009, at 1:06 PM, Upayavira wrote:
The creation of a podling is heavyweight. Very heavy compared to
registering a project with Sourceforge, GitHub or GoogleCode.
Because of
the effort involved in the creation of a podling, it is natural that
the
Incubator PMC wants some reaso
On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 08:04 -0700, Ralph Goers wrote:
> On Aug 7, 2009, at 2:17 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 5:01 PM, Bertrand
> > Delacretaz wrote:
> >
> >> I would oppose to a podling with no code base and no @apache.org
> >> names
> >> in the list of initial committe
On Fri 07 Aug 2009 23:52, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> I was imagining a bunch of unknown people coming up with a vague idea
> for a project, and no code...to that would seem too risky to warrant
> dedicating resources to a podling.
>
> Now, if mentors were enthusiastic about that podling, why n
On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 09:26:45AM -0700, Ralph Goers wrote:
> I agree. If unknown people can generate enough interest from mentors to get
> them to volunteer why stop them. OTOH, I would suggest that mentors should be
> extra cautious in accepting and particularly watchful as the project starts.
On Aug 7, 2009, at 8:52 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Niall
Pemberton wrote:
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 10:01 AM, Bertrand
Delacretaz wrote:
...I would oppose to a podling with no code base and no
@apache.org names
in the list of initial committers - the chances
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Niall
Pemberton wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 10:01 AM, Bertrand
> Delacretaz wrote:
>> ...I would oppose to a podling with no code base and no @apache.org names
>> in the list of initial committers - the chances of morphing that into
>> a working Apache project wo
Noah Slater wrote:
>
> I checked the incubation rules, but couldn't find any mention of this rule.
> Our
> hopes were that we could start from scratch as a podling, and grow the code
> along with the community. Is this going to be possible?
It's not mentioned because there is no such rule. Draw
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 10:01 AM, Bertrand
Delacretaz wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 7:55 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
>> ...I am thinking about making an incubation proposal for a project I've been
>> wanting to do for a while now. I have list of initial committers and a
>> technical
>> architecture pr
On Aug 7, 2009, at 2:17 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 5:01 PM, Bertrand
Delacretaz wrote:
I would oppose to a podling with no code base and no @apache.org
names
in the list of initial committers - the chances of morphing that into
a working Apache project would seem to sl
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 11:01:01AM +0200, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 7:55 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
>> > ...I am thinking about making an incubation proposal for a project I've
>> > been
>> > wanting to do for a while now
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 5:01 PM, Bertrand
Delacretaz wrote:
> I would oppose to a podling with no code base and no @apache.org names
> in the list of initial committers - the chances of morphing that into
> a working Apache project would seem to slim to me.
I agree, and with one or more committers
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Bertrand
Delacretaz wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 7:55 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
>> ...I am thinking about making an incubation proposal for a project I've been
>> wanting to do for a while now. I have list of initial committers and a
>> technical
>> architecture pr
On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 11:01:01AM +0200, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 7:55 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
> > ...I am thinking about making an incubation proposal for a project I've been
> > wanting to do for a while now. I have list of initial committers and a
> > technical
> > ar
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 7:55 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
> ...I am thinking about making an incubation proposal for a project I've been
> wanting to do for a while now. I have list of initial committers and a
> technical
> architecture proposal, but no actual code yet
I would oppose to a podling wi
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 10:24, Noah Slater wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 10:09:49AM +0200, Bernd Fondermann wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 07:55, Noah Slater wrote:
>> > Moreover, in order to provide a seed to grow and ground discussions on
>> > technical levels, the ASF incubation rules requir
On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 10:05:46AM +0200, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> A code base is not required, but highly recommended. It is hard to bootstrap a
> community from scratch. Having something readily available makes a project
> more tangible, and can attract more contributors with more ease.
I'm not
On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 10:09:49AM +0200, Bernd Fondermann wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 07:55, Noah Slater wrote:
> > Moreover, in order to provide a seed to grow and ground discussions on
> > technical levels, the ASF incubation rules require the podlings to join the
> > incubation process with
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 07:55, Noah Slater wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I am thinking about making an incubation proposal for a project I've been
> wanting to do for a while now. I have list of initial committers and a
> technical
> architecture proposal, but no actual code yet.
>
> Moreover, in order to pro
A code base is not required, but highly recommended. It is hard to
bootstrap a community from scratch. Having something readily available
makes a project more tangible, and can attract more contributors with
more ease. Conversely, a too mature codebase can be a hindrance to a
project as well, where
20 matches
Mail list logo
