incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Shahaf <>
Subject Re: Reports needing shepherd attention
Date Sat, 31 May 2014 17:18:13 GMT
[ Brett: thanks for communicating my feedback to Roman; I missed his
question to me in his previous mail. ]

Roman Shaposhnik wrote on Sat, May 31, 2014 at 08:27:55 -0700:
> On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 10:45 PM, Brett Porter <> wrote:
> > The first example listed a piece of software functionality
> > as a graduation goal, which may misunderstand that graduation is about the completeness
> > of the community, IP transfer, and understanding of Apache policies; not the completeness
> > of the software.

Yes, that is precisely the point I was trying to make.

> Regardless, I guess my real question is this: if a podling feels that they
> need to achieve a certain milestone in software completeness before
> they can confidently graduate, are we really in a position to push
> them out of the incubator somewhat against their will?

I can imagine situations in which you'd graduate a podling that has a
diverse and self-managing PPMC and advise the PMC to work with Press, or
Infra, or Brand, or Comdev post-graduation to improve some aspect or

Back to the instance at hand: the project reported that adding a feature
is a graduation blocker.  That is unusual.  The likely explanation is
that they misunderstood what graduation is about.  The situation should
therefore be checked.  If the project has a misunderstanding then it
should be corrected, and if it doesn't then it'd be better if they
clarified in future reports why they, unusually, consider adding a
feature to be a graduation blocker.

> > The second example was that the answer to a question about how a
> > community has developed doesn't depend on mail statistics (though might be aided
by it),
> > so the podling might have misunderstood what the template suggested.
> > However, I'll leave it to Daniel to further clarify if he wishes (perhaps on the
incubator lists for
> > the benefit of those shepherding the podling reports).

A podling was asked "Has your community grown" and replied that the
statistics server was down.  To me, that's not a satisfactory answer,
for the same reason that (with car drivers) a broken speedometer is not
a carte blanche to speeding.

Time for reductio ad absurdum.  Suppose Infra switched to a mailing
lists software that did not allow (P)PMCs to obtain subscriber counts.
Would you consider it reasonable, in that scenario, for (P)PMCs to report
to the Board that they have no idea how their community is doing?  What
would you expect them to do instead?  That is what the PPMC in question
should have done.



P.S. Please CC me on replies.


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

View raw message