incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <>
Subject Re: [PORPOSAL] Fineract
Date Mon, 07 Dec 2015 12:15:31 GMT
I, for one, don't feel slighted in the least. In fact, I
applaud the Champion and the Mentors and especially the
(proposed) podling for having a clear idea on how they
wish this effort to go. They decided that 3 mentors was
the optimal number for them, and have stuck to their
guns. Good for them!

> On Dec 5, 2015, at 12:41 PM, Ross Gardler <> wrote:
> Nobody is turned away. Mentors don't do the work. Contributors do. Mentors do not make
decisions. Contributors so. Mentors have " binding votes" but that is just because of the
structure we have in the ASF, a good mentor will only ever use that vote to enact the wishes
of the community. This is the opposite of "counter cultural". Contributors are what matter
not mentors.
> See recent discussions in the topic of mentors and how many people. Some people, myself
included, feel the role of mentor had changed over the years. In this project we want it to
go back to what it was and should be. Advisors only. We don't want anyone in the pushing to
feel mentors have authority. We want excellent community candidates to demonstrate how merit
it's earned around here. That can include by giving advise from experience within the ASF,
but it will be the podling who decide who is contributing constructively and therefore vote
then in as committers.
> Note this is nothing to do with any individual. I'll pick on Jim as we know one another
(and in fact Jim is a supporter of the one mentor model). Jim has an untold amount of expertise
to offer this project. I imagine, if he had the time to offer, he'll become a committer quickly.
The same will be true for anyone else who contributes.
> Ross
> Sent from my Windows Phone
> ________________________________
> From: Tim Williams<>
> Sent: ‎12/‎5/‎2015 5:08 AM
> To:<>
> Subject: Re: [PORPOSAL] Fineract
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Ross Gardler
> <> wrote:
>> I'm replying top of thread as this is a general reply regarding mentors.
>> We just added Greg Stein as a third mentor. He wasn't on the originally submitted
proposal as he was just checking on availability before confirming.
>> Based on recent conversations in the IPMC I (as champion) advised the project stick
to a single mentor who was willing to put his/her head on the block. This individual would
take full responsibility for rapid turnaround on all items needing mentor feedback. However,
the team had already discussed the proposal with a number of other people. As a result they
feel that 3 mentors is appropriate, respecting both IPMC traditions and those already advising
the community. Hence we have three mentors. We are not seeking more.
> This isn't about "seeking more" - literally a perfectly qualified
> [potential] mentor fell in your lap.  Do what you want, this just
> feels incredibly counter-cultural to me - that is, to actively turn
> away an eminently qualified volunteer.  I think it's both unwise in
> this specific instance and a poor example to hint that its
> acceptable/desirable in general.
> Anyway, best wishes to Fineract...
> Thanks,
> --tim
> ** Just to be clear, I'm well aware that the other three mentors are
> rock solid as well:)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message