[sakai2-tcc] Infrastructure discussion for future meeting?

[Steve Swinsburg]

I feel it gives us a chance to review tools and capabilities and identify areas where we need to focus our attention. There may also be issues with licences that have crept in unnoticed. And capabilities that are now unsupported which in a true incubation model would not graduate. IMO each module should go through it separately.

Many people have recognised that the Jasig incubation process is a good one and we stand to gain a lot from adopting a standardised process for Apereo. Its similar to the Apache model and that is what we are modelling this on.

It is not just the CLE that would be put through this, all existing Apereo projects would go through it, so that we know that everything is in order.

cheers,
Steve



On 08/03/2013, at 6:37 AM, "May, Megan Marie" <mmmay at indiana.edu> wrote:

> Sakai is a successful established product and the community has had a different model for managing new "stuff".  Incubation is a JASIG process and my understanding is that incubation is part of the process to become sponsored.      
> 
> One might argue that Sakai is already sponsored and that to put it through incubation is to say it is something lessor.  
> Megan
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sakai2-tcc-bounces at collab.sakaiproject.org [mailto:sakai2-tcc-bounces at collab.sakaiproject.org] On Behalf Of Steve Swinsburg
> Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 7:56 AM
> To: Seth Theriault
> Cc: sakai2-tcc at collab.sakaiproject.org Committee; Berg, Alan
> Subject: Re: [sakai2-tcc] Infrastructure discussion for future meeting?
> 
> I gave a summary of what has happened in the two meetings (one was today, one a fortnight ago) and various emails within the group. It's only just getting off the ground so please be patient while more is worked out. 
> 
> There is no need to speculate about what an incubation process might entail. Read the Jasig Incubation pages and the CLE tool scorecard, add some room for projects with less of a code focus and you would be pretty close I imagine.
> 
> Also, speculation != defensiveness. Whenever I mention a review of existing tools as part of an incubation process, that's when people get defensive. IMO its imperative that that be done.
> 
> cheers,
> Steve
> 
> 
> On 07/03/2013, at 11:42 PM, Seth Theriault <slt at columbia.edu> wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 7:04 AM, Steve Swinsburg 
>> <steve.swinsburg at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> There will be no surprises. People seem to be rather defensive about 
>>> incubation for existing projects and I'm not sure why, it can only make things better.
>> 
>> People are "defensive" because the new Apereo incubation process has 
>> been talked about in the abstract for months, and no actual 
>> announcements, plans, or progress reports have been made by the 
>> working group, the Board, or anyone else.
>> 
>> Everything about the process and what it COULD encompass is therefore 
>> speculation, but that's all we have to go on.
>> 
>> Seth
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sakai2-tcc mailing list
> sakai2-tcc at collab.sakaiproject.org
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc