incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [META DISCUSS] talking about the overall state of this PMC
Date Wed, 08 May 2013 05:27:50 GMT
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 12:58 AM, Alan Cabrera <list@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>
> On May 7, 2013, at 9:15 PM, Greg Stein <gstein@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On a whole different direction, one way to "scale" is to shift from
>> Incubator-managed podlings to Board-managed. The podling would
>> effectively be a "TLP on probation". The Champion, Mentors, and Board
>> would be providing oversight.
>>
>> I would posit that the Board is more capable of oversight than the
>> IPMC. The Directors have signed up to spend a lot of time -- more than
>> we expect of most volunteers. Not to mention the Board reviews 50+
>> reports every month. Another five won't kill the Board :-P
>>
>> Thus, I might suggest that a proposed-podling may want to try the
>> above approach. (I dunno if the Board would agree, but somebody has to
>> formally ask!)
>
> This pre-supposes that the problem is the IPMC and not the mentors. If the board members
have the spare time to work on incubators then I recommend they come over to the IPMC and
help out.

There is a difference in responsibilities. The Board would review, and
would shut it down if it goes wrong. That is very different from
stepping in to directly guide.

If the probationary TLP is not functioning properly
(mentors/champion/podling are not up to par), then it will get
noticed. I think the IPMC doesn't really notice/correct for this, so
yeah: that *is* my pre-supposition. I also think the Board is capable
of doing this, rather than needing the IPMC layer between the podling
and the Board.

I also feel reporting directly to the Board is necessary education.
And part of the difference is that the Board reviews/discusses the
reports. The IPMC does not have any discussion. The shepherds may set
off some discussion, so they are a good way to try and get some
IPMC-level review/discussion going.

Note: this approach absolutely follows your basic point: Mentors need
to step up and do what they volunteered for. There is nobody to fill
in for their absence, other than the probationary TLP itself. The
Board certainly will not be doing any hand-holding. (and they might be
a bit more ruthless than the IPMC)

Cheers,
-g

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


Mime
View raw message