From general-return-34115-apmail-incubator-general-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org Sat Feb 4 10:22:22 2012 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 6E4919EE7 for ; Sat, 4 Feb 2012 10:22:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 74023 invoked by uid 500); 4 Feb 2012 10:22:17 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 73233 invoked by uid 500); 4 Feb 2012 10:22:10 -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 73224 invoked by uid 99); 4 Feb 2012 10:22:02 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 04 Feb 2012 10:22:02 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of rgardler@opendirective.com designates 74.125.82.43 as permitted sender) Received: from [74.125.82.43] (HELO mail-ww0-f43.google.com) (74.125.82.43) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 04 Feb 2012 10:21:56 +0000 Received: by wgbdr13 with SMTP id dr13so9194925wgb.0 for ; Sat, 04 Feb 2012 02:21:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=opendirective.com; s=opendirective; h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=Pc7e0Re8UmlQdz38bjS5KhS4TFkqraS9vC4tAEgO+vs=; b=Beo2BZTGUwIOmeJDr6MK+bduorKvw0tjeeaMiD8e9SSbsgGrI0DJzTpKiYRUBn6faF HtTVGn3KhN5i1s4zx4lnKV8MZQxHPJlLNDx0bKGlwnrSs/PuF6jOpXbIpArTqMMWUmc3 swrbqc02zL787LAKhXpTJisrix4kOBsfiFxF4= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.180.84.201 with SMTP id b9mr16857661wiz.4.1328350894444; Sat, 04 Feb 2012 02:21:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.180.102.66 with HTTP; Sat, 4 Feb 2012 02:21:34 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [94.7.252.211] Received: by 10.180.102.66 with HTTP; Sat, 4 Feb 2012 02:21:34 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4F2CC6A5.1080501@rowe-clan.net> References: <27CE36D1-CB0C-4EA0-98D1-0A1EF7A6A903@jpl.nasa.gov> <4F2B727E.4010408@rowe-clan.net> <193BC0C4-D070-4EDD-B335-4121AE37CDB7@jpl.nasa.gov> <358643D5-F18E-414A-87F4-09398F5BC410@jpl.nasa.gov> <4F2CC6A5.1080501@rowe-clan.net> Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 10:21:34 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Nomination of Chris Mattman for the IPMC Chair (was: Re: NOMINATIONS for Incubator PMC Chair) From: Ross Gardler To: general@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d044287503351e504b820cbb9 --f46d044287503351e504b820cbb9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity. On Feb 4, 2012 5:50 AM, "William A. Rowe Jr." wrote: > > On 2/3/2012 8:41 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: > > Lets not forget that the model referred to *included* the IPMC. The > > IPMC once had a useful function, it was a safety net for fledgling > > communities. > > The IPMC never served that purpose. Projects were scuttled even in > its first year. Where strong and clear mentorship existed the IPMC has worked just fine. Where absent the IPMC has failed. This is the core of my concerns. Once the proposal explicitly addresses or prevents the circumstances in which strong mentorship is lacking I'll be happy. I wish people would stop arguing with me as if I am saying the IPMC should stay, can people please address my expressed concern, rather than someone welded concerns. Ross --f46d044287503351e504b820cbb9--