Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 64271 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2010 16:46:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 17 Aug 2010 16:46:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 28090 invoked by uid 500); 17 Aug 2010 16:46:07 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 27949 invoked by uid 500); 17 Aug 2010 16:46:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 27941 invoked by uid 99); 17 Aug 2010 16:46:06 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 17 Aug 2010 16:46:06 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [206.190.49.137] (HELO web54407.mail.re2.yahoo.com) (206.190.49.137) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Tue, 17 Aug 2010 16:45:42 +0000 Received: (qmail 1879 invoked by uid 60001); 17 Aug 2010 16:45:20 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1282063520; bh=hzbQG+Mt1N+fDi5R0BH1WGkomChw1n/MzlXmiK/BHbQ=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=cgCKslyI2yj7f4hPIfVy1Ru+bvYpUjmges0IdqKAHzE0NQnEtb5nJf/k3SFgwb3o3yM0KYhkPj9KFVe4DFVDQysz+2aNWoGWb2syFXl5+tjigNA7XtSCKxyCk63wXgPyV+DlW4tEO1dIg/Fhvaebu8D13C7NhfHj9jnB4oDLFIQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=TfDqUCvtP8vLh2CIjOO/3PgVj2P1hOhtiLEywJtvFy1AYHrUasAzBndKyyM5Glr2mPbb4uVjF2dDl+lthkMrNaSWE72eLW48B4LtKTNVKzT+hRw6iqoNVMX2G8RJV48XWJQTWYcN228BFbTKCdjFA1pywhATuv/C0dBNATGGqJ0=; Message-ID: <392945.1407.qm@web54407.mail.re2.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: 64qso30VM1nuM5DLB.gLgMD2iogwf6QCjPTeu9aoImtg.VQ Ss30vHRXDnMcKXPER5UiExo8kEzNTs2kUvk03FkXfVkqGAQkxspXufwMPGBz y4beJ_6emXCWpmbr059eJZa3rN7N7WGbLGwGATV5A32H12KERfPvEA7DIf0a aZEyUbBz.IVbKC00OVK5.q_43Z6b7VOxelASPA9fmMdd4namz.XrFN0aMc8Q .LdcROMA5u2WOPTfr_vJqTFB78uHe8G3XZlmozr0_JnDF4moAO2PlXTQKaRm 0JKxqFMGZp.Hd5gEwoAtaK20xRtD7HtjXswrzuFRhzx47EA-- Received: from [99.135.28.65] by web54407.mail.re2.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 17 Aug 2010 09:45:20 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/470 YahooMailWebService/0.8.105.279950 References: <771995.93506.qm@web54401.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <629602.36637.qm@web54408.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4C6A844D.2040602@apache.org> <175827.9838.qm@web54409.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4C6ABA51.9000203@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 09:45:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Joe Schaefer Subject: Re: Radical revamp To: general@incubator.apache.org In-Reply-To: <4C6ABA51.9000203@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org ----- Original Message ---- > From: Carl Trieloff > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Sent: Tue, August 17, 2010 12:35:29 PM > Subject: Re: Radical revamp > > I've been following this thread, and have another mail written, but not > posted, > maybe I will at some point... however I find myself trying to understand > what would > be the key attributes that would make this proposal a wild success, or a > failure for > a podling. By success, I mean a well run ASF project. The proposal has > caught my > imagination, but I'm trying to understand the parameters of guidance in > this model. > > To this question, (what will make this model succeed or fail) I find > myself not coming > to defensible answers... I would love to see thoughts of others on this > question. > > The thread implies it comes down to the 3+ members on the project. Sorry that I have been mixing threads here. My experiment differs from Greg's in that I'm just looking for a few minor tweaks for a few projects at this point, whereas Greg's, which is the subject of *this* thread, is definitely more radical. While I have little doubt that with people like Greg actively involved in the project, practically any organizational model that doesn't tie him down will work. But Greg isn't the typical Incubator Mentor, and what would work swimmingly for him might not be the best approach for every Incubating project. I do question the idea that just having 3 Members on the project and leaving them to their own devices will actually work well for the majority of our podlings. After all practically everyone on the IPMC is currently a Member, and lots of our podlings have 3 members nominally attached to them. And according to Greg, it just isn't working out. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org