incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <>
Subject RE: What constitute a successful project?
Date Tue, 27 Nov 2012 14:58:38 GMT
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alan Cabrera []
> Sent: 27 November 2012 14:30
> To:
> Subject: Re: What constitute a successful project?
> On Nov 27, 2012, at 12:49 AM, Nandana Mihindukulasooriya wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 7:20 AM, Bernd Fondermann <
> >> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 1:25 AM, Jukka Zitting
> >> <>
> >> wrote:
> >> This is exactly what we did for the last months (years, actually).
> >> Give it yet more time.
> >> Honestly, I don't understand why we should continue in this mode "for
> >> another few months" when it failed for the past years.
> >> Is this the extra-bonus IPMC time
> >
> >
> > Thinking in general not on this specific case, may be we can define a
> > formal warning for retirement for podlings where the PPMC has to come
> > up with a concrete plans for the next six months and some measurable
> goals.
> > Once the formal warning is issued, it can be processed by the clutch
> > [1] and also show the elapsed time. In 3 months, 6 months, 9 months
> > mentors and IPMC can decide whether to remove the warning or not.
> > After one year, if there is no significant change and the goals are
> > not archived, IPMC can easily decide in favor of retirement because
> > they know the history of the issue. At the same time, every three
> > months until retirement PPMC will be notified that they are still
> > under the warning (I think this is somewhat happening even now, as
> > I've seen from Jukka's replies to the board reports), so they will
> > have reasonable time to take action. Of course, we don't need a
> > process like this in the case of the PPMC unanimously agree for
> The first sign of a broken organization is when it decides to add more
> to "fix" things.

Whilst "broken organisation" might be a bit strong I do agree with the
general observation here.

What is described above is exactly what mentors should be doing in an
informal way. What Alan says happened below is what is proposed above.

I've not been following the project and can't agree or disagree with
Alan's interpretation of events. However, I also don't feel well enough
informed to form a valuable opinion. This prompts the question have
those demanding an alternative action to that one recommended by an
active mentor done sufficient background work to be able to stand
behind their recommendation?

On the other hand, if people want to step up to bring new blood to the
mentorship role and Alan wanted to resign as a mentor rather than flog
a dead horse
I'd fully understand. I support Alans observations elsewhere that
mentors taking on responsibility for community development is
inappropriate, it needs to be the project community, but new mentoring
might provide new ideas.


> I will remind the IPMC that seven months ago the specter of retirement
> raised.  A lengthy discussion ensued.  Consensus was garnered.  We even
> added committers with the hopes of infusing new energy into the project.
> It had no effect.
> Regards,
> Alan
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message