commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Henri Yandell" <>
Subject Re: [feedparser] News / Status
Date Fri, 03 Mar 2006 01:27:04 GMT
On 3/2/06, Simon Kitching <> wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-03-02 at 18:02 -0500, Rahul Akolkar wrote:
> > On 3/2/06, Simon Kitching <> wrote:
> > <snip/>
> > >
> > > We should probably be more careful about what projects are accepted into
> > > commons.
> > <snap/>
> >
> > Agreed, but how do we do that?
> >
> > On one hand, its too easy to start a project in Commons, and then have
> > the project stall (for a plethora of reasons). OTOH, our charter says
> > the sandbox is fairly "open". Needs some objective definition if we're
> > going to be selective (such as saying something to the effect of your
> > sentence below and then standing firm).
> Well, maybe we just should emphasise that it's not a "failure" for a
> project to start in the sandbox then move to Sourceforge or similar.

We've done it in the past. We should even be going as far as to
officially record that as a PMC we are giving Kevin our blessing to
continue development at Foo, and we will add a pointer to our site
with that etc.  Commons Graph and Commons Messenger have both 'left'.
Graph with more formality than Messenger, the latter was like this
case - we found out after it had moved.

> >From this point of view, it was the promotion of FeedParser to proper
> without the necessary community support that was the only mistake made.

Yep. You make an important point above - there is more than one exit
strategy for a project from Sandbox, it can goto Proper, it can go
dormant, it can die, or we can give it a blessing to move to a more
singular community.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message