Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1822010515 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2015 18:26:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 70385 invoked by uid 500); 5 Jan 2015 18:26:19 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 70193 invoked by uid 500); 5 Jan 2015 18:26:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 70182 invoked by uid 99); 5 Jan 2015 18:26:19 -0000 Received: from mail-relay.apache.org (HELO mail-relay.apache.org) (140.211.11.15) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 05 Jan 2015 18:26:19 +0000 Received: from mail-la0-f45.google.com (mail-la0-f45.google.com [209.85.215.45]) by mail-relay.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mail-relay.apache.org) with ESMTPSA id BCB401A0041 for ; Mon, 5 Jan 2015 18:26:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-la0-f45.google.com with SMTP id gq15so18768774lab.32 for ; Mon, 05 Jan 2015 10:26:14 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.43.49 with SMTP id t17mr96598949lal.52.1420482374628; Mon, 05 Jan 2015 10:26:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.112.10.16 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Jan 2015 10:26:14 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 19:26:14 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Podlings should be in charge of their mentors (was: Incubator report sign-off) From: jan i To: "general@incubator.apache.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c23c8e597f1a050bebd309 --001a11c23c8e597f1a050bebd309 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Monday, January 5, 2015, Alan D. Cabrera > wrote: > > On Jan 5, 2015, at 9:21 AM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote= : > > > The tracking part is easy, though. What's difficult is the part > > that would require us to do something with poddlings put > > on hold. Unless we come up with clear exit criteria for > > this new state -- I don't think we're solving any real problems > > here. > > There=E2=80=99s no silver bullet here, if a podling cannot whip up a ment= or it=E2=80=99s > because: > the podling is not popular and should probably be retired anyway, being > put on hold will provide impetus for the podling to seek out a new venue > there are not enough mentors > There is no way to magically solve the latter. You mean popular within the pool of mentors (IPMC), the project can still be popular on several other scales. I might lack experience, but why do more active mentors guarantee that the podling will be a better TLP ? We try to solve the problem of mentors not being active but adding more volume. I don't believe that is the right cure. I do agree with bernard that it is the podling that should ask for help....but the IPMC should solve it., rgds jan i > > > Regards, > Alan > > --=20 Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings. --001a11c23c8e597f1a050bebd309--