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 bimargulies@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.214.50 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEWfVJ=XBSTSU3u2yvi4=Z4Aocdz7Bf9ta-odRjMN1tUeMXW9g@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CALhtWkcKw0-Kt6N8PSj0O4aL7hYzFMf_51fO-s6rRuNAE8767Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<B79D38FE-7EDA-4534-90B4-9CBBDBFE7FBE@toolazydogs.com>
	<CALhtWkf8FRMig0PGHQWwuviwvwCa9GR_wqpRQc4cE_xXoBsTtQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAG_bHowWA8Bp8CVDGbRd3yryVxLDnYA2VWcDTW9583-mPQcK2g@mail.gmail.com>
	<1367942109.32165.140661227696513.44D5C847@webmail.messagingengine.com>
	<CABD8fLXAsUHScahF9t-MYi3SppFJVKPxTqxTepySpchWTsamNw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKQbXgCbXikRGYVOyoqWRisTNOGYZVKfgza_45Jpnj+djaCARA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEWfVJ=XBSTSU3u2yvi4=Z4Aocdz7Bf9ta-odRjMN1tUeMXW9g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 8 May 2013 06:53:19 -0400
Message-ID: 
 <CALhtWkfVj73U1MrLvM=ogxS98FvDVTRZ3N+67xBUsmiXJop5Kg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [META DISCUSS] talking about the overall state of this PMC
From: Benson Margulies <bimargulies@gmail.com>
To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

I perceive here that we have reached a favorite knot: the tension
between 'mentor as coach' and 'mentor as supervisor'.

This PMC's job, as delegated by the board, is supervision. If the
mentors don't supervise, who will?

On the other hand, the very term, 'mentor', is much more suggestive of
'coach'  than 'supervisor'.

My proposal tries to deal with a bit of this by focusing on the
champion, asking that person to sign up to at least feeling
supervisory once a month.

To those who felt potentially oppressed by my monthly micro-report,
please recall: I proposed to glue that job to the champion, only
bringing other mentors into it in case of need and by request. It has
no routine monthly reporting requirement for mentors, per se.

Ross' alternative, which has antecedents in previous discussions, goes
in the direction I might label as "let 'mentors' be mentors", a bit,
by formalizing shepherds to give consistent supervision.

We could, ring any number of changes on that theme, including
requiring every podling to launch with N mentors and M supervisors.

I continue to hope for consensus on the thing I wrote. That does not
make me opposed to Ross, or Alan, or any other thoughtful ideas about
additional changes.


On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 5:19 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
<bdelacretaz@apache.org> wrote:
> On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Ross Gardler
> <rgardler@opendirective.com> wrote:
>> ...I've made a proposal for giving the IPMC teeth but it hasn't gained
>> support..
>
> URL?
>
>> ...In the absence of something else with teeth then I'm +1 for
>> probationary TLPs as proposed by Chris as long as we stop accepting
>> projects that are likely to run into problems according to our
>> collective experience....
>
> If you're able to find out that a podling will cause problems in the
> future, or that its mentors will become inactive, maybe I should hire
> you for this lottery betting club ;-)
>
> Apart from that I agree that the board doesn't have cycles to handle
> problematic podlings or missing mentors, and as a result whatever
> actions it would take would be much harsher than what we do here.
>
> -Bertrand
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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