incubator-cvs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Apache Wiki <>
Subject [Incubator Wiki] Update of "MentorRebootProposal" by RomanShaposhnik
Date Mon, 19 Jan 2015 18:13:21 GMT
Dear Wiki user,

You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on "Incubator Wiki" for change notification.

The "MentorRebootProposal" page has been changed by RomanShaposhnik:

  Mentors that are not part of the original podling proposal do not automatically become committers
of the podling simply by being its mentor; they must be voted in to be committers.  Mentors
cannot stay on the podling’s PMC after it graduates unless they have been voted in as committers.
+ === Dealbreakers ===
+   * (rvs) unless we have 'clearly defined document' as part of the same proposal, it is
unclear what is the standard we're holding mentors to
+   * (rvs) since part of this effort is to address the composition of IPMC I would like to
see that IPMC == mentors. Period. IOW, the only way to be added to IPMC is to find a suitable
poddling and convince its community to allow yourself as a mentor.
+   * (rvs) not only do I disagree with removal of a champion role, I feel it is critical.
Perhaps it needs to be renamed, but unless we go to pTLP, Champion should be the closest equivalent
to a Chair person for the poddling.
+   * (rvs) I would like to extend the minimun requirement to "each podling MUST have at least
two active mentors. One of the active mentors has to be designated as a Champion. At least
one of the two active mentors has to be an ASF member."
+   * (rvs) we have to have a timeframe for how long a poddling can be on-hold before it is
considered for retirement
+   * (rvs) IPMC still has to sign-off on the releases, but via a 72 hours lazy consensus
+   * (rvs) the criteria for what makes a mentor be removed from a podling (and thus IPMC)
consists of two parts: signing off on the releases and signing off on the reports. The former
is good, the later is super weak. Unless we introduce a feedback loop of some kind (where
poddlings are required to report back to IPMC on who they consider to be active mentors) I
don't think we will see a change in behavior.
+ === Suggestions ===
+   * (rvs) Instead of flooding IPMC/Chair with email requests, I'd suggest simply removing
all the mentors from content/podlings.xml and then opening a window for them to add themselves
+   * (rvs) Can we agree to track the status of the 'active'/'inactive' via a prop in content/podlings.xml

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message