My feeling is that the incubator incubates communities and their
products.
With the pTLP plan, the communities don't need incubating in the same
way - they have sufficient maturity to self-manage. That is, to my mind,
the essence of the proposal. In which case, it is the product that needs
On 3/4/15 1:41 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Doug Cutting cutt...@apache.org
mailto:cutt...@apache.org wrote:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 5:31 PM, Roman Shaposhnik r...@apache.org
mailto:r...@apache.org wrote:
...
As a director, I still don't think the
Hi Roman,
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 2:31 AM, Roman Shaposhnik r...@apache.org wrote:
...
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=51812862 ...
Thanks for this, I meant to review but haven't found time so far for a
detailed review.
However, reading the comments of other
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 5:31 PM, Roman Shaposhnik r...@apache.org wrote:
At this point, I would like to open this document for soliciting as
wide a feedback as possible. I would like to especially request
attention of the ASF board members who asked for this type of
a document to be available.
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Doug Cutting cutt...@apache.org wrote:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 5:31 PM, Roman Shaposhnik r...@apache.org wrote:
At this point, I would like to open this document for soliciting as
wide a feedback as possible. I would like to especially request
attention of
The bylaws don't grok the idea of a provisional PMC; it either
is one, or it isn't. So whether we call it provisional or not,
legally we need to understand whether we actually want it
as a real, official PMC or not.
And if we do, what, again, does the provisional qualifier really
mean?
On Mar
On 03/04/2015 01:41 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Doug Cutting cutt...@apache.org
mailto:cutt...@apache.org wrote:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 5:31 PM, Roman Shaposhnik r...@apache.org
mailto:r...@apache.org wrote:
At this point, I would like to open this
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 8:56 PM, John D. Ament johndam...@apache.org wrote:
Roman,
I don't think much is missing. One of my concerns with all of these
proposals, especially for participants like myself, is the difference in
how the IPMC operates vs how these PMCs must operate. For someone
Delacretazmailto:bdelacre...@apache.org; Sam Rubymailto:
ru...@intertwingly.net
Cc: Apache Boardmailto:bo...@apache.org
Subject: Re: Soliciting feedback for a detailed pTLP policy document
I obviously speak for the minority, but as a non-Apache Member I would
never be able to provide
Hi!
since a few board members requested a detailed document
outlining the exact policy of a pTLP project, I've created this:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=51812862
which is modeled after the Incubator policy document. My rationale
is this: if the level of
Roman,
I don't think much is missing. One of my concerns with all of these
proposals, especially for participants like myself, is the difference in
how the IPMC operates vs how these PMCs must operate. For someone like me,
I wouldn't be able to help these pTLP's the way I can on the IPMC.
From
@incubator.apache.orgmailto:general@incubator.apache.org; Bertrand
Delacretazmailto:bdelacre...@apache.org; Sam
Rubymailto:ru...@intertwingly.net
Cc: Apache Boardmailto:bo...@apache.org
Subject: Re: Soliciting feedback for a detailed pTLP policy document
I obviously speak for the minority, but as a non-Apache
@incubator.apache.org general@incubator.apache.org,
Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org, Sam Ruby
ru...@intertwingly.net
Cc: Apache Board bo...@apache.org
Subject: Soliciting feedback for a detailed pTLP policy document
Hi!
since a few board members requested a detailed document
outlining the exact
@incubator.apache.orgmailto:general@incubator.apache.org;
Bertrand Delacretazmailto:bdelacre...@apache.org; Sam Rubymailto:rubys@
intertwingly.net
Cc: Apache Boardmailto:bo...@apache.org
Subject: Re: Soliciting feedback for a detailed pTLP policy document
Roman,
I don't think much is missing. One of my
Delacretazmailto:bdelacre...@apache.org; Sam
Rubymailto:ru...@intertwingly.net
Cc: Apache Boardmailto:bo...@apache.org
Subject: Re: Soliciting feedback for a detailed pTLP policy document
Roman,
I don't think much is missing. One of my concerns with all of these
proposals, especially for participants like
:31 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.orgmailto:general@incubator.apache.org; Bertrand
Delacretazmailto:bdelacre...@apache.org; Sam
Rubymailto:ru...@intertwingly.net
Cc: Apache Boardmailto:bo...@apache.org
Subject: Soliciting feedback for a detailed pTLP policy document
Hi!
since a few board members
Thanks Roman,
I think that it is unnecessary to mention sub-projects in this document.
If an external codebase and community are going into an existing TLP, it is
often possible to do so via an IP Clearance process, depending on size of
external community.
// Niclas
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 9:31
@incubator.apache.orgmailto:general@incubator.apache.org
Cc: Bertrand Delacretazmailto:bdelacre...@apache.org; Sam
Rubymailto:ru...@intertwingly.net; bo...@apache.orgmailto:bo...@apache.org
Subject: RE: Soliciting feedback for a detailed pTLP policy document
I may be taking a more cynical interpretation, but when I
18 matches
Mail list logo
