On Mon, 2004-01-26 at 11:53, Emmanuel Florent wrote: > > If not, we should discuss this more. > What about a standalone project for the torque-gen ? > I think that that proposal is rather a small component than a standalone > project. Think about Axion, Think about an full featured IDE @apache. > That probably would be revolutionary, but that's not my proposal. > > That's why I would like to refer to http://db.apache.org/newproject.html > rather than > http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html
I will update the documentation. The newproject.html document precedes the incubation policy and is no longer accurate. Projects should not accept large code donations (where large is subjective, but a set of code published under a license for use and with its own website probably qualifies) without going through the incubator. It does not matter whether a project (db) plans to incorporate the code into an existing product/subproject or keep it separate. How many committers to torque-gui or devaki.org are currently committers to torque? How many committers to torque-gui are there currently? If more than one, do they all agree on the move and change of license. If only one, are you used to working in a consensus based environment. If you were already committing code to torque and there were no license or copyright issues, then you could just add the code to torque without going through the incubation process, so it could be taken that I am trying to make things difficult. But I am really just trying to make sure we don't end up in a fight over the bureaucracy. The ASF has created the incubator as a process to help ensure legal matters are attended to. It's not good for the community to try to circumvent these processes, but to try to make them as streamlined as possible. john mcnally --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
