incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Incubator report sign-off
Date Tue, 30 Dec 2014 10:12:40 GMT
On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 4:04 AM, jan i <jani@apache.org> wrote:

> On Tuesday, December 30, 2014, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacretaz@apache.org
> >
> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Andrew Purtell
> > <andrew.purtell@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > > ...Certainly some projects have a de facto lead that coincide with
> Chair
> > and I'm pretty sure
> > > in some cases that is an honorary arrangement agreed to by the
> > community....
> >
> > *loud red alarms going off all over my brain*
> >
> > If that's the case, such projects should make sure they implement a
> > regular PMC chair rotation. Or be prepared to go down in flames once
> > that leader changes their mind and no one has a clue how their project
> > runs.
>
> big +1....actually the chair rotation is something we should consider
> having as a rule (and allow deviations for good reasins).
>

I cannot see the Board ever mandating chair rotations. That is up to the
community. As long as the chair/VP remains administrative, then there isn't
a problem. We have *many* chairs across the Foundation (myself included)
that have been in their position for many years. It works well because we
*support* the project, rather than any attempt to direct, steer, or lead
based upon that position. The VP is the link between a project's needs and
the Foundation's support for that project, along with bidirectional
communication.

For projects that don't understand the difference between "supportive" and
"lead": yeah, they could use a dose of trout-slapping and a chair rotation
or three.

Cheers,
-g

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message