incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "robert burrell donkin" <robertburrelldon...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Don't +1 lightly (was: Re: [VOTE] Incubator PMC to approve the 3.0-M2 release of ServiceMix)
Date Wed, 05 Jul 2006 13:26:06 GMT
On 7/5/06, Paul Fremantle <pzfreo@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Actually this raises an interesting discussion about the Incubator PMC.
>
> There is kind of a tricky role for Incubator PMC members. Because most
> of us have no knowledge or affiliation with any given one of the tens
> of incubator projects, we find it hard to have any say, especially
> when it comes to a vote (e.g. release, graduation).
>
> A few hardy souls (you know who you are - and thanks!!) get involved
> in doing real reviews of releases or projects that they haven't got a
> direct connection too, but on the whole its pretty quiet when it comes
> to a vote.
>
> On the other hand, if its only the PMC members associated with a given
> project who vote, then perhaps there isn't enough oversight and
> unbiased critical validation going on.
>
> So here is a suggestion. Each incubator project could have nominated
> two or three PMC members whose job is to pay attention to the project.
> As opposed to a mentor - who is there to actively help, these PMC
> members would be there to pay enough attention to have an input on
> releases, status and graduation. They wouldn't need to be involved in
> the technical aspects of the project. The focus would be on
> understanding whether the project got the Apache way - votes,
> releases, community. To use a trendy word - governance.


the only downside to this plan would be to create YAR (yet another role). we
already have sponsor, champion and mentor. it's hard enough to explain these
without adding another one to the list. so, i'd probably prefer to reuse the
mentor role.

IMHO a successful incubation requires at least one mentor to adopt an active
role.

this is akin to the role that a chair plays in a standard project. if a
distinction is needed between mentors then perhaps the initial ppmc
(consisting only of mentors) could elect a ppmc chair who would adopt this
more active mode. this would also allow (in time as the ppmc matures towards
the end of the incubation) the chair to stand down to be replaced by a
non-mentor and adopt a more passive role.

- robert

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message