Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B84379B68 for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2011 02:56:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 51111 invoked by uid 500); 28 Nov 2011 02:56:55 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 50967 invoked by uid 500); 28 Nov 2011 02:56:55 -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 50949 invoked by uid 99); 28 Nov 2011 02:56:54 -0000 Received: from minotaur.apache.org (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (140.211.11.9) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 28 Nov 2011 02:56:54 +0000 Received: from localhost (HELO mail-iy0-f175.google.com) (127.0.0.1) (smtp-auth username cdouglas, mechanism plain) by minotaur.apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 28 Nov 2011 02:56:53 +0000 Received: by iahk25 with SMTP id k25so8198443iah.6 for ; Sun, 27 Nov 2011 18:56:52 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.169.38 with SMTP id ab6mr48669228igc.26.1322449012878; Sun, 27 Nov 2011 18:56:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.42.222.202 with HTTP; Sun, 27 Nov 2011 18:56:52 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References:

<1322444006.12858.YahooMailNeo@web160915.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 18:56:52 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: concerns about high overhead in Apache incubator releases From: Chris Douglas To: general@incubator.apache.org Cc: "kafka-dev@incubator.apache.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: > I think you missed a very important part of what I said, let me quote > the para you refer to: [snip] > My point is we can't expect the mentors to type everything over and > over again for every podling, that's why we have docs. We can (and > should) expect mentors to answer questions and point out errors in the > application of what is learned from the docs. Fair point, though the prevailing IPMC consensus is difficult to identify and more relevant than the docs. Suffice to say that we'll update the latter. Doing it on general@ feels like repaving a potholed road without diverting traffic, but we can try it. > This I can agree with. There are other threads underway right now > addressing this very point. Do you think the proposals floating around > right now will help address this and provide adequate support to > mentors? I doubt I'm caught up on all the threads, but changing the "champion" role to be more accountable and enforcing pass/fail for projects in a sane timeframe sounds like a good start. Chris's idea of identifying IPMC members with particular specialties- for mentors and PPMC members to ask questions and get straight answers- would be a welcome service, also. So that the root of this thread is not lost: the Kafka podling is about to roll its 8th RC, after updating the LICENSE to include the NUnit requirement. If any IPMC member has other feedback for the last RC: http://s.apache.org/Vnr NOW is the time to provide it. -C --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org