incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marvin Humphrey <>
Subject Re: When podlings don't file a report
Date Thu, 22 Oct 2015 00:57:10 GMT
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Ross Gardler
<> wrote:
> This is one aspect that I feel needs fixing. Currently there are too many
> people who "might" be responsible. What we need is someone who *is*
> responsible. It's initially the mentors, but if (as per your original
> question) a podling has failed to file for 4 months then the mentors are
> clearly dropping the ball or they need assistance in impressing upon the
> podling community how important this is. So who next?
> My answer is the IPMC, but then we hit the "too many cooks problem".

I don't think it has to be that way.  All any IPMC Member has to do is check
in on the Mentors by sending an email to, say, private@incubator.  That's what
not happening right now.

If there is at least one Mentor willing to continue, all they have to do is
respond "I'm on it" and either persuade the podling to report the next month
or add a comment to the report themselves.

If there are no Mentors willing to continue, then the IPMC has to work with
the podling to arrange for new Mentors or retire.

I don't see a situation there where "too many cooks" end up arguing about the
proper course of action for very long.  Of course someone might stick their
nose in but if there are active Mentors who just needed a nudge, the situation
ought to be resolved quickly.

> To your "shepherd" point below the term here in the IPMC is different to the
> term at the board level. Board shepherds *are* responsible for following up
> after board meetings. That's where the buck stops.

Indeed, the "shepherd" institution is implemented effectively by the Board
level.  We don't have such shepherds in the Incubator... BUT we do have

Mentors are in fact *better* positioned to offer insight than Incubator
shepherds they follow the podling consistently.  We just squander their
insight, because shepherds own primary responsibility for commenting on the
state of the podling.

It's as if the Board had assigned a Director to watch over a TLP then relied
solely on the Board shepherd for their assessment, forgoing all input from the
Director on-the-ground.

Marvin Humphrey

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message