incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John D. Ament" <johndam...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Incubator report sign-off
Date Wed, 31 Dec 2014 03:46:55 GMT
On Tue Dec 30 2014 at 1:26:31 PM Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 7:26 AM, John D. Ament <john.d.ament@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > > Absolutely not just noise. Take the extra 2 seconds to add your sign
> off.
> > >
> >
> > I disagree.  Checking a check box is much different than adding
> meaningful
> > comments, either on mailing lists or on the report itself.
> >
> > For example, which gives you better info that I feel confident in
> Tamaya's
> > board report.
> >
> > My check here: https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/December2014
> >
> > or my comments in this thread:
> >
> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-tamaya-
> dev/201411.mbox/%3CCAOqetn8wkYuDNkTwkpKKOGzu%3Ds_cf4VMT5A9_e8mdpM6mOh-6Q%
> 40mail.gmail.com%3E
> >
> > All the check does (from my point of view) is give someone a brief
> summary
> > that things are looking good.  The check mark doesn't imply any due
> > diligence on the mentor's part.  It's very misleading to see it that way.
> > Take a look for example at the log4cxx2 podling's report.  It has mentor
> > sign off, but the contents are barely present.  The only reason it has
> > mentor sign off is because the mentor wrote the report, after I (as the
> > shepherd) reminded the podling.
> >
>
> John,
>
> Are you seriously suggesting that the board should be delving into all the
> incubator mailing lists to determine whether you are paying attention to
> your mentoree groups?
>

No, not in the slightest.  But someone needs to look at it.  Our current
notion of a board report is completely on the honour system.  It doesn't
safeguard from the chance (which from what I can tell is more often the
case) of a mentor writing and signing a report saying it's good to go.

You can see some examples of this effect here:

http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/logging-log4cxx-dev/201412.mbox/%3C1418063938.3890690.200338789.1D0EE7B3%40webmail.messagingengine.com%3E

There are also cases where there are clear issues w/ the podling but aren't
getting communicated properly on the report (or maybe just oversight?)

http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ripple-dev/201412.mbox/%3CBY2PR03MB490FFD83B71E97C269A12DF99660%40BY2PR03MB490.namprd03.prod.outlook.com%3E

My point is that just because there's a checkbox checked doesn't mean
there's issues.  Maybe what would help is to have, during shepherd perhaps,
some coaxing in to putting more into the issues for the IPMC/board section.

Maybe it's more of a "don't hesitate to put something in that area" thing
that needs to happen.

John


>
> The check-box is the concise way that you indicate that the activity on the
> mailing lists is happening.  There is a known defect with checkboxes in
> that they can be ticked without mentoring activity behind them, but that
> doesn't mean that we should introduce a new failure mechanism where there
> is good activity but no tick box.
>
> Yes, the tick box is supposed to be an echo.  It is a redundant
> summarization.  And it is very helpful because all the tick boxes are in
> one place for easier review.
>

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