Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of bimargulies@gmail.com
 designates 74.125.82.43 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <3C56FD26-7391-48F7-8000-72577CA5E8A2@dslextreme.com>
References: <4F2CC216.2000501@rowe-clan.net>
	<CB529939.B19D%mfranklin@mitre.org>
	<CALhtWkcX6d-OFsvqe=9UCR1BygNHB60cOo553sg-tW03f4UUnA@mail.gmail.com>
	<2D312AA4-E581-4159-8C32-B5CAC99CBC98@dslextreme.com>
	<CALhtWkdYGUFfJ38G84YUN4MGNoSXbxaGQioXUzbCpfdigwyRAw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALhtWkdBJqq42+9t+bh5SO6q5oL7Vh8iKWtveO4+qhMbjjBryw@mail.gmail.com>
	<8B104153-40FF-4655-8B26-B6DA6BD71C9A@dslextreme.com>
	<CALhtWkckJ72yZ=5XBFW3ByFfwm0F9rqrPb+fWewAdm8Jx_2-sA@mail.gmail.com>
	<3C56FD26-7391-48F7-8000-72577CA5E8A2@dslextreme.com>
Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 13:44:14 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CALhtWkeD98yJY+UVgzvZhsoNO2TQy1fGEurkZp52pjF3EO9=2w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Evolution instead of a revolution (Was: Time to vote the chair?)
From: Benson Margulies <bimargulies@gmail.com>
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com> wr=
ote:
>
> On Feb 4, 2012, at 8:59 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>
>> Ralph, I'm inclined to hair up the chart to distinguish 'podlings'
>> from 'probationary projects'. Otherwise, fine. I'll do that.
>
> I see from your latest updates that you still have the podlings requiring=
 IPMC approval for releases and new members. I suppose that works if are on=
ly in the incubator a few months but I can easily imagine a project perform=
ing a few releases and still preferring to stay in the incubator while they=
 build community. =C2=A0I'd really prefer to delegate these to the podlings=
, subject to approval from their mentors and only involve the IPMC if they =
can't get the required mentor approval. =C2=A0IOW, the vote threads would t=
ake place on the podling lists and only the results would be published to t=
he IPMC and the IPMC would use a process similar to the board's for approva=
l (I believe the new process is a 72 hr wait with an implied ack upon recei=
pt).

So, here's the difference I'm splitting. For what I hope can be a
really brief period of time, the podling is stuck with the IPMC just
as podlings are currently stuck with the IPMC. Thereafter, just as in
Chris' proposal, off they go to make their own mistakes. The advantage
of this, as I see it, is to avoid inventing any new governance
structure for the Foundation. Initially, in the IPMC, subsequently, on
their own.

However, if you and others would rather push this in a direction more
like: 'podlings are born self-governing under the supervision of the
IPMC, and move to self-governance under the supervision of the board'
(I'm thinking a bit of Roy's email) I have no objection at all, feel
free to edit it that way.

>
> What about the current requirement that mentors be members of the IPMC? =
=C2=A0Personally, I don't see the value of that, especially for ASF members=
. =C2=A0The IPMC should be made up of people who care about the incubator a=
s a whole, not just specific podlings.

I agree. In either of the alternatives above, there's no reason to
load up the IPMC.

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

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