On 10/08/2011 05:15 PM, Ayal Baron wrote:
1. I think the opening paragraph is redundant:
"The oVirt Board has realized that for oVirt to be truly successful, the quality and
health of its associated projects must be extremely high. However, oVirt itself is just
starting out and also realizes the need to have a low “barrier to entry” for new projects
as well as a streamlined approach to accepting in new projects."
2. " The new project agrees ..
.. to integrate with one of the oVirt published API’s
.. to support the platforms release schedule."
Agreeing should be the requirement in order to enter the *incubation* phase.
Actually implementing the above should be required in order to graduate from the
incubator (necessary but not sufficient)
3. More detials at
4. "All IP associated with the project codebase and support files (eg: website
content, logos, documentation, etc) is in good standing, tracked and provides a clear
license from copyright holder to oVirt."
First, shouldn't we have a disclaimer about patent infringements in the new project?
Also, should we require specific open source licenses? or maybe require that the licenses
are compatible with oVirt licenses?
no, this is not required, the ASL2 covers that sufficiently. But
applying the ASL, all these items are being agreed to.
5. "The Incubated project can, at any time, petition for a vote
of the Board to graduate to full status. The vote of the Board must be unanimous. Any NO
votes must clearly indicate why the Director did not approve graduation and must provide
clear guidance on what he/she is looking for to address the deficiency."
How often would the board "convene"?
The board does not need to convene for this, votes can be started
24/7/365 days a year. As long as they are left open long enough for
people to comment. typically 72 hours. see the page on voting.