Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 19:50:40 -0800 (PST)
From: Chris Hostetter <hossman_lucy@fucit.org>
To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org>,
    Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: should podlings have informal chairs?
In-Reply-To: <1321923808.40552.YahooMailNeo@web160905.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1111211939400.14225@bester>
References: <46183E72-B786-4298-B14A-848A6D362D9B@apache.org>
 <CAOGo0VZn7eCOONGyq=bVsXLfrSkuCyH=Pjb2qGr+OJpSDVb+Lg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPFNckjO0yWv-zvekNd-OrXk8OmAL4YmFTxjumHY6nh+Z5TNKA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1321894027.61167.YahooMailNeo@web160915.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <CAKQbXgCWZpxwU+-nEhnpzdNaLEYpO=-rKEctvcgi0Vkjcanzvg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADBq88DX-2+T1=gwW_TaVzYRKLGZMuVco+HGJVnFEdXv4M6aug@mail.gmail.com>
 <1321901706.58942.YahooMailNeo@web16091 9.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <CALhtWkfTnT4H7QBnAWFKATeETckw=xymDwYc5JMJ6+P-4XFo=w@mail.gmail.com>
 <1321902709.42027.YahooMailNeo@web160904.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <CAFG6u8FBqOnfQTt+_=t_a7OqKUWp5e_wrKrWJjDa3qnp0-nvvg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALhtWkdG+Rc15Smkz0-RLUkbnKm3q0a90pzDd6Y+mJ6PLsfzWA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFG6u8GOygHZSWRvWfmUArSoS7O45oMXpsD5=u=r=YiZzJ9XeQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALhtWkcc6chYuioULqbO0Biq2DW_sGZQ-=h-ZFN-Fb3pPLTp5Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <1321923808.40552.YahooMailNeo@web160905.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="8323328-1795589768-1321933843=:14225"

--8323328-1795589768-1321933843=:14225
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT


: We should be reporting to the board about OUR work, not the work of
: the podlings.� Podlings should only be brought in for a few specific
: examplesto mention.� That's the first thing to correct.

While I generally agree with everything you suggest, your entire premise 
seems to be in direct conflict with everything that I've ever seen/heard 
brought up regarding the point of Board Reports and the argument against 
"Umbrella Projects" -- notably ....

 * Umbrella Projects add a layer of indirection that make it hard for the 
board to know when there are problems in the individual (sub/leaf) 
projects.

 * The Board needs regular status updates on all the projects in the ASF 
(where podlings are considered projects)

While it seems to be historically accepted that the Incubator is one the 
exception/exemption to the "No Umbrella" rule, I seem to recall it being 
argued that that exemption doesn't change the fact the individual podling 
reports are suppose to propogate all the way up to the board to. (but i 
could be wrong)

That said: (Even if i am remembering correctly) Things change.  

If the new world order is that the Membership is cool with the IPMC acting 
as a proxy for the Board, and that the Board doens't need to "lay hands" 
on direct reports from each project/podling, then so be it .... just makes 
me wonder if that means there should be some re-consideration of the 
Umbrella rule in general -- Because another way to help scale the 
governance of the ASF as a whole would be to add some Umbrella management 
for groups of projects that have a lot of overlap)


-Hoss


--8323328-1795589768-1321933843=:14225
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
--8323328-1795589768-1321933843=:14225--