Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of rgardler@opendirective.com
 designates 209.85.212.177 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAAS6=7iskGov_-Zk0ktbiSCiay3dgxdianTU9incbHwmNEYHkw@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CA+ULb+vSvtWjvQYH5LQvSfZksi5GhsbahtHQZNo=Qm-CZNVhZQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGU5spdnS06Cfm-3_siV5NQRc_2uPiF5Dw9JD1bbPGxYq8RjPQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1349944338.12771.140661139289233.0B44EF33@webmail.messagingengine.com>
	<CA+ULb+sFF9-f0ThamxjTCfwXfpCXRRE2aOpNd9tXVqV4YbBdUQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADiKvVttuu3P6Qmo3u87E1-D3J-hzQV43N8OYk_jo+xdbadkJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+ULb+svjWdcW6oHBaqngY8gDKyYxnRQ=tYXeet-Qt0XAVbUMA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAS6=7iskGov_-Zk0ktbiSCiay3dgxdianTU9incbHwmNEYHkw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 09:06:10 +0100
Message-ID: 
 <CAKQbXgAXZmwH6ky=MLGnNEVbeX1khnBWqMjK+YYRstgsoHdk9A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Jr. Mentor role
From: Ross Gardler <rgardler@opendirective.com>
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6d7eb661e75d604cbd8298d

--0016e6d7eb661e75d604cbd8298d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Sent from my tablet
On Oct 11, 2012 8:01 PM, "Marvin Humphrey" <marvin@rectangular.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Roman Shaposhnik <rvs@apache.org> wrote:
> > However, see my 'how would it help to clear 3 +1 IPMC votes hurdle'
question
> > on this thread'?
>
> If you help to audit the IP of the podling and to instill good habits and
> values, it will make it considerably easier for the formal Mentors or
other
> IPMC members to add their +1.
>

I hope not. Nobody, in my opinion, sh8old be voting on a release without
having conducted the appropriate verifications themselves.

I'm all for enabling more people who have demonstrated an understanding of
the important of proper release voting to be a part of the IPMC.

> The first AOO release got my freelance IPMC vote because it was clear that
> they knew what they were doing and were taking their role as IP stewards

(As a mentor I also voted +1 so don't take my next comments personally)

This is a perfect example of why proper reviews are necessary. In the
second AOO release a problem was discovered (that was present in the first
release). Everyone who voted +1 either missed it (human error)  or gave the
false impression that they had verified the release.

> , it is much more important
> that the community members own the task of IP management themselves than
that
> they pass any sort of superficial documentation review.

Isn't that a contradiction? If you voted +1 on the grounds of the PPMC
knowing what they we doing isn't that a the most "superficial of
documentation reviews"? It seems all you reviewed was some mailing list
traffic.

There is no doubt the PPMC was doing a pretty good job but without proper
oversight from mentors there are a number of short cuts that would have
been taken that would have been against policy. There really needs to be a
proper review by everyone who votes. That's why we require 3 +1s rather
than a majority or some other high barrier.

> PS: People who help out with this demanding and time-consuming work
accumulate
>     the sort of merit that lands them on the IPMC and in the ASF
membership.
>

+1

I encourage us to empower more people who do the work so their vot3s are
binding.

Ross

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

--0016e6d7eb661e75d604cbd8298d--