From: tools-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:tools-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Mik Kersten
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007
12:31 PM
To: 'Tools PMC mailing list'
Subject: RE: [tools-pmc] RE:
[ve-dev] Contribution on VE with XML editor
Just fyi, this is
pretty much how Mylyn operates. We haven’t yet bitten the bullet of
creating another project, but for the past couple of years we’ve had a
separate set of Sandbox components where we incubate things. While we don’t
have the benefit of the parallel IP process, this does give us the ability to
communicate Incubation status on those components, given them their own update
site, project set, etc.
In addition to the
lack of parallel IP process, which is probably the biggest benefit of
incubation, the thing that’s I’ve been finding most awkward about
the single project approach is that the incubation components don’t have
their own set committers, as they would with a separate incubation
project. Bjorn made some other good points about the split project
approach here:
http://eclipse-projects.blogspot.com/2007/09/getting-new-people-started-in-your.html
Mik
From: tools-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:tools-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Doug Schaefer
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007
8:09 AM
To: Bjorn Freeman-Benson; Doug
Schaefer
Cc: Tools PMC mailing list
Subject: RE: [tools-pmc] RE:
[ve-dev] Contribution on VE with XML editor
Incubator
components would make sense. Having to recreate the project structure, even if
it is the same people, is where I have issues. Also the façade that they are
two separate projects is misleading to the community since operationally they
are not. Projects in my mind are organizational things, i.e. the people. Is it
the code that’s incubating or the people?