incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mohammad Nour El-Din <nour.moham...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Change in Due Dates for Board reports
Date Thu, 17 Nov 2011 08:46:17 GMT
Hi Sam...

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 4:18 AM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 8:56 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din
> <nour.mohammad@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:44 AM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 8:22 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din
> >> <nour.mohammad@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Hi...
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:07 AM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Noel J. Bergman <noel@devtech.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >> > PLEASE NOTE!
> >> >> >
> >> >> > From the ASF Board:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >  For now on, all reports to the board for review/inclusion at
the
> >> >> >  board meetings will now be due 1 WEEK before the meeting. Reports
> >> >> >  submitted late will be declined and you'll need to resubmit the
> >> >> >  next month.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > This means that Incubator reports really need to be finished by
the
> >> end
> >> >> of
> >> >> > the FIRST week of the month.
> >> >>
> >> >> Why not make it easy?  Make incubator reports due by the first of the
> >> >> month.  Doing so doesn't increase workload, doesn't meaningfully
> >> >> increase latency/relevance, and gives the incubator more of a chance
> >> >> to recover (and actually obtain a report in time) when a deadline is
> >> >> missed.
> >> >
> >> > IMHO one week before the board meeting as a final date is fine and at
> the
> >> > same time will give the chance for review and resolving any issues if
> >> they
> >> > exist.
> >>
> >> Can you support this belief with evidence?  It is not uncommon for
> >> podlings to miss being included in board report, and this month the
> >> incubator report itself wasn't reviewed due to it being late.
> >>
> >> I can tell you (as a Director) that if those problems are fixed,
> >> nobody on the board would care if the deadline was mere hours before
> >> forwarding onto the board, but I do want to point out that there is a
> >> real problem that needs some solution, even if it isn't the one I
> >> proposed.
> >>
> >
> > Well from my own experience that this time frame is  good, but for some
> > projects mentors are not that active and hence they are not pushing
> things
> > forward till it is too late, and hence either way you will get delayed
> > reports, only this time you can get more delayed reports.
> >
> > I totally understand the point you are trying to make, but what I am
> trying
> > to say that time limits are not the problem, from what I saw it is either
> > the problem of mentors, not being active, or podling developers are not
> > active or even both, these are the real reasons and having delayed
> reports
> > are just one symptom.
>
> I'll agree, but what I would like to see is that incubator taking a
> greater role in identifying inactive mentors and inactive podlings and
> taking corrective action.  Note: that includes me both in (a) needing
> to take a greater role and (b) as an inactive mentor for at least one
> PPMC.
>
> To be fair: this month's incubator report demonstrates an intent to do
> exactly that.  Please don't interpret what I am saying as "bad
> incubator: change", please interpret it as "good incubator: more!".
>

No worries I totally understand you Sam :)


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


-- 
Thanks
- Mohammad Nour
----
"Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving"
- Albert Einstein

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