incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject Re: Anyone care to talk to ComDev? (was Re: Time to vote the chair?)
Date Sat, 04 Feb 2012 17:15:15 GMT
Hey Ross,

On Feb 4, 2012, at 9:03 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:

> Chris, seriously, take a break. You are not hearing what I'm trying to  say
> and therefore not answering my concerns, directly at least.

I could say the same thing to you. :) 

We both care about this stuff, which is why we keep replying. I'm happy
to continue to reply, so long as you are when I feel it's warranted. I've
ignored a few of them that I didn't have the energy to, but that's the point
of a mailing list. At the end of the day, I hope with the diligence and effort
I've provided to reply to folks concerns (whether they think I've replied
or addressed them or not), I am basically brain dumping and trying to 
not leave any question as to what my opinions are. 

> 
> For an example see where you use the word failure in this reply - that word
> has no bearing on anything I have said, yet you directly attribute it to
> me.

Ross, read your email. You said:

>> 
>> 
>> Arguably, legal and the Legal Committee have a hand in this, no?
>> I'm not sure it was entirely managed by the IPMC before.
> 
> Again, I agree the IPMC has not always worked, but it has not always failed
> either.

You said "failed", suggesting I had implied the Incubator was a failure, or 
suggesting I don't know what to be honest. But you used the word, not me, buddy.

> 
> I've made up my mind about how I feel about this proposal. In general I
> like it. I have some concerns that I will express in a summary document
> that I'll share with ComDev. At this point b I'm not sure if my concerns
> are misplaced our not.

Your concerns are valid. I hope you can agree that at least when you've tried
to raise one, I've tried to reply to it; whether it's to your satisfaction or not
that's up to you, but at least I've tried.

> 
> Thanks for taking the time to try and understand my issues. Enjoy the rest
> of your weekend.

You too, dude. I'm sure at some point, we'll all sit down have a beer 
about this stuff. In the interim, I'll set up the bastille (ooops, I mean, sorry
Benson, I didn't mean that.... tee hee)

Cheers,
Chris

> 
> Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
> On Feb 4, 2012 3:57 PM, "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <
> chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Ross,
>> 
>> On Feb 4, 2012, at 2:36 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>> 
>>> Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
>>> On Feb 4, 2012 3:41 AM, "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <
>>> chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>>>> [...snip...]
>>>>> Who fixes it?
>>>> 
>>>> The project's PMC. And if not, the project's VP. And if not that, the
>>> board,
>>>> or the membership. Just like the current way it works for existing TLPs.
>>> 
>>> if l the "membership" what is the channel used and who is responsible for
>>> ensuring that channel works?
>> 
>> The same channel that exists today for normal projects. The board is
>> elected by the membership. If the board doesn't fix the problem for the
>> project, and the membership is unpleased, the members elect a new
>> board that will fix it. Or they won't.
>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> Who is maintaining the standards with respect to IP
>>>>> management?
>>>> 
>>>> How much work is there maintaing them? What's left to do?
>>> 
>>> I mean in individual projects, not in defining policy. Even in the
>> poddling
>>> that I've felt would benefit from this proposal the RM has learned by his
>>> mistakes. Some of which were caught by IPMC review when an additional
>> vote
>>> was needed.
>> 
>> Sure, and in my proposal it'll be caught by review of having 3 ASF members
>> on the project; by actually signing up strong ASF members (or "mentors")
>> to the project (as Benson said) who care about that stuff (release review,
>> etc.), and by having
>> a VP for the project. Or by the board. Or by the legal committee.
>> 
>> If you think about it, I'm simply proposing to use what's there, and to
>> move more towards the existing foundation resources, than to pretend
>> that the IPMC was the only place that we could get this information from.
>> A lot of the passionate legal folks or release review folks in the IPMC
>> (ant, Sam, etc.) are also members of the legal committee, and/or lurk
>> there. A lot of the release passionate folks (Joe S., myself etc.) also
>> lurk in other
>> places that will see releases happening (infra@, etc.). It's not putting
>> extra
>> burden on them to ask them to flag what they see, or provide advice.
>> They're
>> doing that already.
>> 
>>> Who provides these cross-checks?
>> 
>> See above.
>> 
>>> 
>>> You asked if a project couldn't muster the binding votes on a release,
>>> what's it doing on the incubator. This project couldn't, but it is still
>>> graduating. Ironically when I suggested bringing the RM into the IPMC to
>>> help other podlings trying to find votes Bill, who supports this proposal
>>> said yes, but required that the RM must refrain from voting on his own
>>> releases. That position seems to conflict with this proposal and I'm
>>> unclear what the difference is.
>> 
>> I can't speak for Bill, but I can say that Bill "gets" what I am saying
>> (and so do quite a few others).  Bill is just keeping up with the threads
>> right now, and doing a great job.
>> 
>> You'll note I supported giving your RM his VOTE, and in my proposal
>> you wouldn't have had problems mustering any binding VOTEs. You'd
>> have had them already like any other project management committee.
>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Arguably, legal and the Legal Committee have a hand in this, no?
>>>> I'm not sure it was entirely managed by the IPMC before.
>>> 
>>> Again, I agree the IPMC has not always worked, but it has not always
>> failed
>>> either.
>> 
>> Stop calling it a failure. I *never* called it a failure. I called it a
>> success.
>> Even things that are a "success" end.
>> 
>>> 
>>> Are legal@ going to do reviews when necessary? If not who is?
>> 
>> Of course they are. They do it now for existing projects, that come
>> to them and ask (Sam's famous phrase). And even before that, the ASF
>> members who
>> are on the project committee (and even the non members) need
>> to do a bit of reading, and try and help out there as much as possible.
>> Signing up to be a PMC member on an incoming project means
>> investing the time to help out in some way. The member doesn't have to be
>> all
>> knowing or be the super star champion. That's why the trust is
>> distributed amongst the members of the PMC just like any PMC,
>> is funneled through the chair of the committee, and is acted or
>> reacted upon by the board, and why the board is elected by
>> the membership.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Chris
>> 
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
>> Senior Computer Scientist
>> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
>> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
>> Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
>> WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
>> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>> 
>> 


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


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


Mime
View raw message