Return-Path: 
 <general-return-40849-apmail-incubator-general-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org>
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 52C63F7EF
	for <apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org>;
 Wed,  8 May 2013 18:37:13 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 33967 invoked by uid 500); 8 May 2013 18:37:12 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org
Received: (qmail 33745 invoked by uid 500); 8 May 2013 18:37:12 -0000
Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:general-help@incubator.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:general@incubator.apache.org>
List-Id: <general.incubator.apache.org>
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org
Received: (qmail 33733 invoked by uid 99); 8 May 2013 18:37:12 -0000
Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 May 2013 18:37:12 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0
	tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_SOFTFAIL
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: softfail (athena.apache.org: transitioning domain of
 list@toolazydogs.com does not designate 209.85.220.41 as permitted sender)
Received: from [209.85.220.41] (HELO mail-pa0-f41.google.com) (209.85.220.41)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 May 2013 18:37:07 +0000
Received: by mail-pa0-f41.google.com with SMTP id rl6so1541772pac.28
        for <general@incubator.apache.org>;
 Wed, 08 May 2013 11:36:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=google.com; s=20120113;
        h=x-received:content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date
         :cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer
         :x-gm-message-state;
        bh=QXY1Vf7IGdlBtADG/4U807nQr2huNCzFStj//TuUFHE=;
        b=gIAg0KDFCMCuCSGG6NgZ+7qx6aZoxbZUZH+PSRIOKtFze8uVK3ZyfA09CBqdL01CNG
         XsZAp0OM8dw/WwW3Dx91XE8x67dYfTIbWDF2nn936Gz0NgLLJfBEiB9co/gC+z9dDHOU
         eCdHhYurWDtQ3SvwvI+BvAKzqbjwblER/Ud+vk0kutZQsQPuz1fJvbBg91vgJXefuwtC
         yKS5J69y1Vw0QBYwjbhZuYYTHTbhljC0Aw1zf4RKAlJ3SRm599i+yPHyonQAOlrQR3Ol
         gLCYiQGgwHLUKBscCwQufSuh3ONEAyCKw+nISQn41G61deUwr//EFGmi6m1TP1xtoVCh
         XSDA==
X-Received: by 10.68.90.197 with SMTP id by5mr8844174pbb.196.1368038207151;
        Wed, 08 May 2013 11:36:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kafernan-w7n1.linkedin.biz (dagmar.corp.linkedin.com.
 [69.28.149.29])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id
 bl3sm8788751pbd.12.2013.05.08.11.36.45
        for <multiple recipients>
        (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Wed, 08 May 2013 11:36:46 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\))
Subject: Re: If I were king of the forest
From: Alan Cabrera <list@toolazydogs.com>
In-Reply-To: <20130508182055.GQ33720@USLT-205755.sungardas.corp>
Date: Wed, 8 May 2013 11:36:41 -0700
Cc: Tim Williams <williamstw@gmail.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <8CD209DF-9BE6-4050-AE0B-E3D366097C93@toolazydogs.com>
References: <78102006-44E3-42FA-B73E-A8D7676865CD@toolazydogs.com>
 <CAG_bHowg_DMAbKO3NHQ51OABAwqFWQe4=6gYsQBbNykj8ZQdVg@mail.gmail.com>
 <518A89E7.9010500@tibco.com>
 <9672F17D-82EF-4116-9E04-FC652E04A618@toolazydogs.com>
 <20130508182055.GQ33720@USLT-205755.sungardas.corp>
To: general@incubator.apache.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499)
X-Gm-Message-State: 
 ALoCoQny1xoX4bSdNr/1GHHHyxr4cep+6FgmOzp3UIXjWrqyDc/C0ItPV8GyNLeZZzWveAK1PpYm
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org


On May 8, 2013, at 11:20 AM, Chip Childers <chip.childers@sungard.com> =
wrote:

> On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 11:00:14AM -0700, Alan Cabrera wrote:
>>=20
>> On May 8, 2013, at 10:22 AM, Eric Johnson <eric@tibco.com> wrote:
>>> One last suggested refinement:
>>>=20
>>> At least two mentors, but perhaps not allow more than three, where =
the third is generally a backup for the others in a transition period, =
such as one of the mentors looking to shed their responsibilities. One =
point that has come out of the discussion has been a lack of clear =
responsibility. Adding more mentors dilutes that responsibility. Two =
allows one as backup for the other.
>>=20
>> Yes, this was what I was thinking as well.  Two active mentors, maybe =
one or two inactive ones but since they officially declared themselves =
inactive the active mentor know not to assume anything of them.
>=20
> I may be incorrect in my understanding of the official ASF policy here
> [1], but WRT a release, doesn't it require at least 3 +1 votes of the
> appropriate PMC (in the case of podlings, the IPMC)?  If the mentors
> were limited to 2 within the podlings, then would that leave all =
podling
> in a position of having to get a third +1 from the IPMC?
>=20
> In some cases, podlings have enough active mentors that this whole
> thread doesn't apply (clearly the discussion is about areas where =
there
> are problems).  My concern would be making it harder for *well
> functioning* podlings / mentors to get through releases.

We're the IPMC, we can change the rules if we need to.

I don't see how my proposal will change things for well functioning =
podlings with active mentors, but I do agree that we should not mess =
with the mojo of successful podlings.


Regards,
Alan


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