Issue 5: Should all projects be required to start as a lab prior to being proposed for Incubation?

extension

The normal path for projects is for all of them to first start as a lab prior to being proposed as a project. Requests for derogation can be made to the TSC.

Mic Bowman

Should there be an "entrance" criteria that is couched in terms like the release criteria? That is, does a project have "code" or can a project be just "good ideas"?

Mark Wagner

I think that this is too general. It works if someone comes in with an idea on something that people would like to try. 

However, if an company is donating shipping code then we need to be able to have clear criteria for how to handle that. I would not expect newly donated code to have a wide diversity of companies, but it could have a lot of contributors. How is that handled?

• Jun 14, 2019

1. Vipin Bharathan

   There have been many projects that have had just a few contributors and have found wide adoption. For example the first Bitcoin code was just written by one guy. People found the idea compelling and started using it, of course many joined as core developers later. Usefulness is the most important criterion. We have to give time for an idea to blossom. If we apply our criteria to projects that took a while to take off- are we going to nip some very useful project in the bud?

   • Jun 14, 2019

   
   
   

2. Arnaud J Le Hors

   Given the lack of consensus in forcing all projects to start as a lab I have amended the proposed resolution to specifically state that going through a lab is not required, which is the status quo.

Suggest we add a Resolution 5.2:

"Projects should provide a publicly available git repository (or multiple repositories, if appropriate) of the initial source code as part of project submission. The repositories should be appropriate for cloning as the basis for initializing the project."