This guide was generated from real proposal discussion threads on the Apache Incubator mailing list and reflects the topics that were actually raised while proposals were being discussed.
This guide is intended for:
It is designed to support understanding of the kinds of questions and concerns that surfaced during proposal discussions prior to a proposal vote.
Proposal discussions mainly focused on whether a project was suitable for incubation at that time.
This guide documents the specific themes that appeared in proposal discussion threads: what participants questioned, what they asked proposers to clarify, and which factors were considered relevant to proceeding with a proposal vote.
Guidance in this document complements but does not replace ASF policy.
Proposal discussions often explored whether the project appeared ready to enter incubation.
In threads where readiness was questioned, the discussion commonly asked about:
These questions were usually framed around timing and preparedness, rather than whether the idea was worth pursuing.
Many proposal discussions returned to what development looked like before the proposal.
Where this came up, participants asked for observable signals such as:
These threads tended to focus on demonstrated practice rather than stated intent.
Some proposal discussions examined who was involved and what the early community looked like.
When raised, questions focused on:
These were treated as indicators of sustainability and governance health.
In proposals that appeared to originate inside a company, discussion sometimes focused on independence and control.
Where these concerns were raised, participants asked about:
These topics were often framed as governance and perception risks to be managed early.
A number of proposal discussions included explicit focus on mentors.
Where mentor coverage was discussed, topics included:
Mentor coverage can be treated as part of practical readiness to proceed.
Proposal discussions frequently asked proposers to tighten or clarify the scope.
When scope questions were raised, the discussion often focused on:
These questions typically sought a clearer definition, not a technical review of quality.
Some proposal discussions surfaced naming and trademark questions early.
Where raised, topics included:
These were usually handled as entry conditions rather than something deferred until later.
In some threads, participants discussed whether the project belonged in the ASF and whether incubation was the right path.
Where this occurred, questions sometimes touched on:
These discussions were generally framed in terms of fit and purpose rather than technical merit.
A smaller set of proposal discussions focused mainly on process.
Where this happened, topics included:
These threads tended not to raise substantive readiness concerns.
Some discussions occurred before a full proposal was ready, or alongside early attempts to enter the process.
Where these appeared, topics included:
These threads often centred on whether a proposal could be brought forward in practice.