Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: softfail (nike.apache.org: transitioning domain of
 list@toolazydogs.com does not designate 209.85.192.174 as permitted sender)
From: "Alan D. Cabrera" <list@toolazydogs.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="Apple-Mail=_91192ABD-BFEA-4EA5-AD1B-5045EE980CAF"
Message-Id: <A3365755-3D1F-49FA-A005-6B071BDAEDA2@toolazydogs.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.1 \(1993\))
Subject: Re: Next steps for various proposals (mentor re-boot, pTLP, etc.)
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 06:35:55 -0800
References: 
 <CA+ULb+siD4L8KyN6B9nG5jmTb+DdDSbp8xPWStLgttbZRkcs_Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+ULb+t2xNGJFj1edSRpEpAgnh8K+M2gPiNcM-6v-hjy1U64ZQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+RK=_CX3ELoXYpL0w4AsjzaiyjZu88j=ajxFZm_o18Sq6SOwA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACO5Y4wW+cbjam3bBq85F29fDSYiKw5ASJNLC1s9qnHjwpr46w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEWfVJ=26KBbi6B5+pts83h8cLZ51tsQFxUu4mqzY8NGRm_u2Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: general@incubator.apache.org
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEWfVJ=26KBbi6B5+pts83h8cLZ51tsQFxUu4mqzY8NGRm_u2Q@mail.gmail.com>

--Apple-Mail=_91192ABD-BFEA-4EA5-AD1B-5045EE980CAF
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8


> On Jan 19, 2015, at 11:57 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz =
<bdelacretaz@apache.org> wrote:
>=20
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:37 AM, Chris Douglas <cdouglas@apache.org> =
wrote:
>> ...So make a list of the IPMC members
>> you believe should judge the other 90%, and submit a proposal to the
>> board to start a new project. Fork the incubator....
>=20
> How is that different from pruning the current IPMC membership by
> removing inactive members?
>=20
> I don't think those inactive folks are a problem, but if people think
> they are it's easy to ask them if they want to stay, and remove those
> who reply no or don't reply.

No one is saying that the problem is inactive IPMC members. =20

No one.

Isn=E2=80=99t it obvious what the above and IncubatorV2 proposal are =
about?  Consolidating like minded individuals into a new IPMC and =
shutting out the other inconvenient members until "they come to their =
senses=E2=80=9D.

Frankly, if there are IPMC members that are a real problem then it=E2=80=99=
s the job of the VP of the Incubator to have a =E2=80=9Cchat=E2=80=9D =
with them.  Are there really so many that it warrants a reboot of the =
IPMC itself?


Regards,
Alan


--Apple-Mail=_91192ABD-BFEA-4EA5-AD1B-5045EE980CAF--