incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Reform of Incubator {was; [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator)
Date Tue, 04 Aug 2015 21:45:41 GMT
Who are the village spinsters?


On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 1:21 PM, Branko Čibej <brane@apache.org> wrote:

> On 03.08.2015 21:51, Julian Hyde wrote:
> > In my experience incubating Calcite, the “overhead” was mostly the
> infrastructure and process, not politics. (If you think the incubator is
> political, you haven’t seen politics…) The process is necessary (mostly) to
> ensure clean IP. The infrastructure, less so. So, if we’re talking about
> how to reduce the burden on podlings, those are the areas I would focus on.
> >
> > Roman’s proposed reform places more responsibility on podling PMCs and,
> by implication, the mentors embedded in those PMCs.
>
> At the end of the day, it *is* the mentors' responsibility. The IPMC
> mostly gets involved after the fact.
>
> > I am not sure how well that would work in practice given the ongoing
> problem of absentee mentors. The IPMC epitomizes the “it takes a village to
> raise a child”, in particular with village elders stepping in with
> help/advice from time to time. It would be a shame to lose that.
>
> There's no need to lose that. But it would be a really good idea to lose
> the village spinster who makes the child afraid of the dark and monsters
> under the bed ...
>
> -- Brane
>
>
> >> On Aug 3, 2015, at 12:23 PM, Ross Gardler <Ross.Gardler@microsoft.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> " This is that proverbial "political overhead" that a lot of folks are
> accusing ASF of and cite as a reason of not going into the foundation.
> Which is grossly unfair at the board level, but unfortunately seems to be
> very true at IPMC level today."
> >>
> >> +1000
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: shaposhnik@gmail.com [mailto:shaposhnik@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> Roman Shaposhnik
> >> Sent: Monday, August 3, 2015 12:13 PM
> >> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: Reform of Incubator {was; [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite
> from the Apache Incubator)
> >>
> >> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 3:44 AM, Joe Brockmeier <jzb@zonker.net> wrote:
> >>> On Sun, Aug 2, 2015, at 10:05 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> >>>> I've been waiting for a bout a week for other to chime in, but it
> >>>> seems that nobody has so I'll repeat my question as of a week ago:
> >>>> what would be the effective way to change the status quo around IPMC
> >>>> an make it more board like?
> >>>>
> >>>> Perhaps we can start from making the release policy actually make
> >>>> sense along the lines that Ross has outlined. I guess I can propose
a
> >>>> change to the current policies (or to Ross'
> >>>> point just get it back from the wayback machine :-)).
> >>>>
> >>>> But seriously, who else thinks the movement towards empowering PPMCs
> >>>> and making IPMC very much like the board makes sense?
> >>> I think the thread fizzled because there's not a lot of support for
> >>> the idea. At least, on my end, I'm not in favor.
> >> Yup. I believe this to be an unfortunate (at least from my standpoint)
> but and extremely fair observation.
> >>
> >> As far as I'm concerned the issue of R&Rs of IPMC is in a state of a
> stalemate right now. We clearly have a "everything's fine lets just add
> more policy" constituency vs. "IPMC should be small and more board like"
> crowd.
> >>
> >> The good news is that we're all united on making sure that the
> foundation is growing by podlings making progress and graduating to TLPs.
> The bad news is that because of the current mentality I don't see the types
> of unfortunate threads that Ignite just went through going away anytime
> soon.
> >>
> >> This is that proverbial "political overhead" that a lot of folks are
> accusing ASF of and cite as a reason of not going into the foundation.
> Which is grossly unfair at the board level, but unfortunately seems to be
> very true at IPMC level today.
> >>
> >> It is clear to me that the change has very little chance of coming from
> within IPMC.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Roman.
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>


-- 
Best regards,

   - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)

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