incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Patrick Hunt <ph...@apache.org>
Subject Re: June report prep
Date Fri, 05 Jun 2015 19:23:40 GMT
Ted can you give some concrete examples, because I see some good feedback
along with folks attempting to address the feedback. Processes updated or
re-iterated, etc... I haven't seen any comments like "stop the presses
till... is addressed" and that being ignored. More along the lines of an
issue being raised and the community immediately working to address it. For
example most recently giving more time to construct the board report.

Failing to cc general@ on the vote is a serious issue. That's part of the
release process though, it's documented and been followed in previous
releases. Human error this time around afaict (along with the mentors,
myself included, who didn't notice it till later)
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SENTRY/How+to+Release

> They seem oblivious to process issues

Are there specific process issues that are missing and should hold up a
vote? I see alot of process related details on their wiki
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SENTRY/Home

Patrick

On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 8:03 AM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't think that the Sentry PPMC actually disagrees with the mentor's
> recommendation (and, in fact, at least one person agreed to reverting to
> monthly reports).
>
> But in reading the last 4 months of traffic on the dev list, I really don't
> think that the PPMC has internalized the critique at all either.  They seem
> oblivious to process issues and have even voted to try to proceed with
> graduation without really noticing that there are problems.
>
> This indicates (to me) that the Incubator shepherds and project mentors are
> largely not being understood by the PPMC.  Neither are the release
> procedures being internalized.  The result is that the conversation tends
> to go a bit like
>
> MENTOR: I see a serious problem X
> PPMC: We will have to address that in the future
> ...
> PPMC: Let's release
> ...
> MENTOR: I see a serious problem Y with your release
> PPMC: We will have to address that in the future
> ...
> ...
> PPMC: Let's graduate
>
>
> There is never an argument or contradiction to the assertion of a problem,
> but there doesn't seem to be much attention paid either.  My impression is
> that the community is not actually reading the dev list very carefully.
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 3:23 PM, John D. Ament <john.d.ament@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Does the Sentry podling (PPMC) disagree with their mentors
> recommendation?
> > I agree with the mentors proposal for both and actually raised this last
> > month as an issue.
> >
> > John
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 8:56 AM Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Marvin,
> > >
> > > Thanks as ever for the coaching.
> > >
> > > One question that has come in from David Nalley is how to deal with the
> > > issue of Sentry.  They have had some problems with process and seem not
> > to
> > > recognize that in the report.  David suggests reverting to monthly
> > reports
> > > as we try to clear up the questions.  I suggest adding a note to the
> > > report. The situation is a bit problematic because there are several
> > people
> > > in the project who should understand process better and raise this
> issue
> > > themselves.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Marvin Humphrey <
> marvin@rectangular.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 8:38 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 4:35 PM, Marvin Humphrey <
> > > marvin@rectangular.com
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> The responsibilities of the Report Manager are documented using
a
> > > > script,
> > > > >> report_runbook.py, which generates all the necessary commands.
> Ted,
> > > > please
> > > > >> try running this from a checkout of the Incubator Subversion
repo:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>     python3 report_runbook.py --month=6 --apache-id=tdunning
> > > > >>
> > > > >> The first action of the June report cycle is to send the
> "timeline"
> > > > email
> > > > >> to general@incubator.  This should be done by the last Wednesday
> of
> > > the
> > > > >> month, so that people see it a full week before podling reports
> are
> > > due.
> > > > >> Here's a sample:
> > > > >
> > > > > Yay!
> > > > >
> > > > > With the correct version of python, this now works for me.  We
> won't
> > > know
> > > > > what problems I had before, but I don't plan to care too much.
> > > >
> > > > Hi Ted,
> > > >
> > > > Now that the deadline has passed for filing podling reports, we can
> > > > perform a
> > > > few more actions.
> > > >
> > > > *   Normalize podling report formatting.
> > > > *   Generate list of releases.
> > > > *   Categorize the podlings by stage of incubation and create the
> > podling
> > > >     summary.
> > > > *   Edit podlings.xml to assign podlings who did not report a
> "monthly"
> > > tag
> > > >     so that they don't fall through the cracks.  See
> > > >     <http://s.apache.org/At0>.
> > > >
> > > > See the output of report_runbook.py for more detailed instructions
> and
> > > let
> > > > us
> > > > know if you have questions.
> > > >
> > > > I'll work on the narrative section either tomorrow or Saturday.
> > > >
> > > > The goal is to have everything done by Sunday night so that we can
> send
> > > > out a
> > > > mature draft on Monday.
> > > >
> > > > Marvin Humphrey
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

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