Pablo - those are reasonable steps for the non-Apache side of this, yes.

On Tue, 28 Nov 2017, at 11:58 AM, Pablo Ojanguren wrote:
> I agree too. This project/community doesn't make enough progresses for
> being under Apache umbrella.
> 
> However regarding the future of the project I still work in my own fork
> that can benefit Wave, so I want to
> keep Wave somewhere.
> 
> From a practical standpoint, I did recap this tasks (what else?)
> 
> - Name for the GH organization / project? e.g. WaveCommunity or
> WaveProtocol / Wave
> 
> - Who want to be member of the new GH organization.
> 
> - Website replacing incubator.apache.org/wave/ and the wiki... e.g. just
> a
> GH page/site
> 
> - New communication channels, replacing incubator mailing lists. e.g.
> slack
> or another mailing list? Ask and add those who want to follow new
> channels.
> 
> Pablo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2017-11-27 21:53 GMT+01:00 Zachary Yaro <[email protected]>:
> 
> > Just so I understand, what would be the criteria for the project rejoining
> > the Apache Incubator in the future?
> >
> > For instance, we have had several people (myself included) comment that
> > they would become more frequent contributors to the project once the server
> > and client were sufficiently decoupled that a JavaScript client could be
> > worked on separately from the Java GWT client.  Should that happen, and
> > regular work on the project continue, could the project easily rejoin, or
> > would there be a higher barrier to reentry?
> >
> >
> > And on another note, if the project is retired, what happens to the
> > documentation and mailing list archives from Apache, and would anything be
> > done to help migrate that elsewhere?
> >
> > (On a related note, do we still have access to waveprotocol.org and the
> > related mailing list?  That would seem to be the logical place to migrate
> > to.)
> >
> > Zachary Yaro
> >
> > On 27 November 2017 at 14:43, Dustin Pfannenstiel <
> > [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > I've set up a repo and organization for the code base on github.
> > > https://github.com/TimaeusWave/WaveServer
> > >
> > > Thanks for the years of support and, well, just everything.
> > >
> > > DMP
> > >
> > > > On Nov 27, 2017, at 11:33 AM, Upayavira <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, at 04:46 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> > > >> The in depth "incubator required stuff" is at
> > > >> https://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html for review
> > > >>
> > > >> Basically,
> > > >>
> > > >> - We have this conversation.  Ensure that there's consensus on the
> > > future
> > > >> of the project.
> > > >> - Call a vote.  When we call a vote, one of us will send notice to
> > > >> incubator.
> > > >> - Vote again on general@incubator.
> > > >>
> > > >> I do want to make sure there are two things abundantly clear:
> > > >>
> > > >> - Retirement isn't failure.  Wave didn't fail as a project.
> > > >> - It's better to describe it as "this isn't a good fit as an Apache
> > > >> project."  Apache projects tend to have at least three people
> > available
> > > >> at all times, either making changes, merging in changes, or able to
> > cut
> > > >> releases.
> > > >
> > > > What John described above is the process from Apache's side.
> > > >
> > > > The code is publicly available under an Apache License. Any of you can
> > > > push your local repo up to GitHub and share it with whoever you like,
> > > > using a name that includes the word "Wave", so that would be a step
> > > > alongside the more ASF-focussed administrative tasks above.
> > > >
> > > > Upayavira
> > >
> > >
> >

Reply via email to