incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Schaefer <joe_schae...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Incubator reorg ideas: sub-groups per technology?
Date Sat, 15 Jun 2013 15:08:15 GMT
What we really need for podlings is a "bill of
rights" towards what they can expect of their
mentors, because too few of them actually are
willing to question the participation of the
people who signed up to mentor them and that's
not helping anybody.



>________________________________
> From: Alan Cabrera <list@toolazydogs.com>
>To: general@incubator.apache.org 
>Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2013 11:04 AM
>Subject: Re: Incubator reorg ideas: sub-groups per technology?
> 
>
>
>On Jun 15, 2013, at 7:16 AM, Upayavira <uv@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> I think there's merit in the idea of multiple, smaller incubators, so
>> long as it is set up in a way that doesn't involve prospective podlings
>> playing the incubators against each other.
>
>Can you provide detail on what you mean by "prospective podlings playing the incubators
against each other"?  I'm not sure what that means.
>
>> Smaller groups, with smaller membership, gives the chance of a greater
>> sense of ownership and identification, which are important to community
>> building.
>
>Is that really our problem?  Who needs this greater sense of ownership and identification? 

>
>In short, I'd like proponents of this thread to explain in concrete detail:
>What is the problem to be solved?
>What is the base cause of that problem?
>How does splitting the Incubator in to sub-groups of technology solves the cause of this
problem?
>
>
>Regards,
>Alan
>
>
>
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message