incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Schaefer <joe_schae...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Insanity. Apache Incubator should be about education (was: [PROPOSAL][VOTE] Subversion)
Date Mon, 09 Nov 2009 16:19:37 GMT
----- Original Message ----

> From: Justin Erenkrantz <justin@erenkrantz.com>
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Mon, November 9, 2009 7:56:53 AM
> Subject: Re: Insanity. Apache Incubator should be about education (was:  [PROPOSAL][VOTE]
Subversion)
> 
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 4:39 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
> wrote:
> > OTOH, podlings that don't have 3 active mentors can't get 3 binding
> > votes internally, so IPMC members have to jump in sometimes. Thanks to
> > those of us who do!
> 
> I view the proposal accepting the projects with the listed mentors as
> delegating the oversight to the mentors.  So, I don't know if it
> should be required that you must get three IPMC members to vote on
> every little thing a podling does.  I think it tends to let projects
> think that people who don't contribute anything deserve merit and have
> rights to tell them what to do.  I'm not sure that sets an appropriate
> precedent.
> 
> Let me put it another way: if the IPMC accepts a proposal with one
> mentor, then I'm fine with that one mentor acting on behalf of the
> IPMC without the need to constantly go back to the IPMC for approval.
> -- justin

For non-release issues, I'm fine with that.  For releases I would still insist
on 3 +1's from IPMC members; if a podling can acquire those without coming
to general@incubator for final approval I could live with that (I'd need to
update the IPMC release guidelines tho).


      

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message