incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pierre Smits <pierre.sm...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy
Date Fri, 09 Oct 2015 22:07:17 GMT
Pierre Smits

*OFBiz Extensions Marketplace*
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/

On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 11:31 PM, Ross Gardler <Ross.Gardler@microsoft.com>
wrote:

> No. Meaning that starting from a place of no-trust in an environment where
> trust is critical is wrong.
>
> Ross
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pierre Smits [mailto:pierre.smits@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 9, 2015 2:26 PM
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy
>
> Meaning: proactively trying to doing the right thing, trying to define
> boundaries before wrongdoing happens, is wrong?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Pierre Smits
>
> *OFBiz Extensions Marketplace*
>
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3a%2f%2foem.ofbizci.net%2foci-2%2f&data=01%7c01%7cRoss.Gardler%40microsoft.com%7ce3df44d6e18b409c180c08d2d0f042cc%7c72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=jTO4UHTjBVDxUGUNMAPv5ocD5hBmTU0Xj9xM1PTNWEk%3d
>
> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 10:51 PM, Chris Douglas <cdouglas@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Daniel-
> >
> > If you have these concerns about mentors, a TLP proposal, or even an
> > active TLP substantiated only by private information: notify the board
> > via board-private@. That's why it's there.
> >
> > The proposal accuses mentors of selling influence, and acting contrary
> > to the foundation's interest. That is by definition a problem to which
> > we react, with proof of guilt. "Proactively" treating volunteers as
> > suspect demands that mentors prove their innocence. Assuming guilt is
> > not "proactive," but uncivil and immoral.
> >
> > There are also practical objections. Every IPMC member has a binding
> > vote on decisions made by the incubator, period. IPMC members may
> > voluntarily recuse themselves, but a policy that suppresses the votes
> > of "suspicious" groups is invalid.
> >
> > The TLP resolution is only recommended by the IPMC. Anything achieved
> > by this proposal is better implemented by the board considering that
> > recommendation in context- including evidence provided privately- and
> > rejecting improper proposals with actionable feedback to the PPMC. -C
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Daniel Gruno <humbedooh@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > Does there always have to be an actual problem before we can propose
> > > a policy? must we always be reactive instead of proactive?
> > >
> > > Yes, I am in a way implying that some mentors are, perhaps, not
> > > neutral in their work. I will not back it up with specific names or
> > > contexts, as I don't want to take a trip to lawsuit town for things
> > > I cannot back up with publicly available information.
> > >
> > > I don't find this to be uncivil accusations - can you outline a
> > > specific segment that you find uncivil? I am proposing a set of
> > > basic rules - which is naturally up for discussion and improvement -
> > > that would potentially alleviate us from having some nasty
> > > discussions - whether they be public or private - about the
> > > neutrality and honesty of recommendations, and hopefully ensure we
> > > have a more leveled playing field in the incubator.
> > >
> > > I'll stop here, as my eyesight is playing a trick on me today and
> > > not allowing me to see what I type.
> > >
> > > With regards,
> > > Daniel.
> > >
> > > On 10/09/2015 08:03 PM, Chris Douglas wrote:
> > >> What problem does this solve?
> > >>
> > >> This proposal lacks context. It implies that mentors are not
> > >> neutral, and that they are motivated by interests not shared by the
> > >> ASF. But it does not outline the merits of that belief, neither
> > >> does it specify how this proposal would address them. Instead of
> > >> allowing those definitions to float, this discussion would be more
> > >> productive if it were about some concrete problems for which there
> > >> is evidence. Yet another thread of rude responses to uncivil
> > >> accusations is unproductive, even if it is an IPMC tradition. -C
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 8:07 AM, Daniel Gruno <humbedooh@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >>> Hi Incubator folks,
> > >>>
> > >>> I would like to propose we adopt a mentor neutrality policy for
> > >>> incubating podlings:
> > >>>
> > >>> - A mentor must not be financially tied to the project or its
> > incubation
> > >>> status.
> > >>> - A mentor must not have a vested interest in incubating,
> > >>> graduating or dismantling a podling that goes beyond the general
> > >>> Apache mission
> > >>> - A mentor must not be affiliated with the entity granting the
> > >>> code (company or original project community)
> > >>>
> > >>> Furthermore, I would like to see this extended to votes on
> > >>> graduating
> > or
> > >>> retiring podlings, so that only people with no organizational
> > >>> (aparty from the ASF) or financial ties to the project (or the
> > >>> companies behind
> > >>> it) can cast a binding vote on graduation or retirement.
> > >>>
> > >>> This would essentially mean:
> > >>>
> > >>> - If you work for a company (or are hired as consultant/advisor)
> > >>> that
> > is
> > >>> entering a project into incubation, you cannot mentor it nor vote
> > >>> for/against its incubation, graduation or retirement.
> > >>> - If you are a in the original community behind the project, you
> > >>> cannot mentor it nor vote for/against it.
> > >>>
> > >>> I believe this would create a neutral mentorship whose sole
> > >>> mission is to guide podlings with the interests of the ASF in mind.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Please do discuss this. If there is (mostly) positive feedback, I
> > >>> would like to, at some point, have a vote on including this in the
> > >>> Incubator policy. I realize this would cut down on the number of
> > >>> potential mentors, and I would ask that more people step up to the
> > >>> challenge of mentoring if adopted.
> > >>>
> > >>> With regards,
> > >>> Daniel
> > >>>
> > >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>> --- 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
> >
> >
>

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