Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
From: "P. Taylor Goetz" <ptgoetz@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
Subject: Re: Incubator Governance Change
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 14:48:46 -0400
References: <CAD8z1JKSZd88WDovwFTnYnN=dipXTF9CKauba5Np8=tp0UzHwA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGU5spcYKm=6Vcr+O4m7q+nOjSGxO6mxSK89sao3Jg_dwVW6Gw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAD8z1JLOFGwd7pXup_SnJHRHn+7-Nsq-ptWsVe0So8ZihLYERg@mail.gmail.com>
 <AD12FAE3-0B18-4339-8D86-302D5B58815F@occamsmachete.com>
 <B0908E86-C00B-43D8-B463-28FA760AC642@occamsmachete.com>
 <0f7218a4-7d18-06c1-0720-6eecadf7f346@shanecurcuru.org>
To: general@incubator.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <0f7218a4-7d18-06c1-0720-6eecadf7f346@shanecurcuru.org>
Message-Id: <64E17118-F78C-49D5-90AE-A269A248F2DD@gmail.com>
archived-at: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 18:49:01 -0000


> On Apr 23, 2017, at 11:09 AM, Shane Curcuru <asf@shanecurcuru.org> =
wrote:
>=20
> Pat Ferrel wrote on 4/22/17 11:46 AM:
>> Probably the wrong place for this but=E2=80=A6
>>=20
>> What do people think about a governance change for approving releases
>> through the IPMC to wit:
>>=20
>> A week of no vote activity over the release proposal of a podling
>> should be considered a passing vote. In other words the IPMC is to
>> become a vetoing group.
>=20
> No, because as noted in this thread the board and Legal Affairs
> Committee already have a policy for Apache software releases:
>=20
>  https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#policy
>=20
> This is the spot where all the little legal bits of having a =
corporation
> intersects with the Incubator's ability to mentor new podlings in how =
to
> effectively run projects in the Apache Way.  However that legal policy
> in particular is not going to change IMO.
>=20
> Personally, I support any proposals that help ensure podling mentors =
are
> more actively engaged, and can better serve as the formal IPMC votes =
for
> podling releases.  Great to see some serious discussion about that in
> this thread and the upcoming IPMC chair election.  The incubator has
> been getting better organized as a whole over the past few years, and
> keeps improving, which is great to see.
>=20
>> I propose this for 2 reasons: 1) lack of votes or attention from the
>> IPMC seems all too prevalent and puts an undo drag on the energy and
>> velocity of community involvement. 2) the release has already been
>> voted on and checked by at least 3 PMC members of the podling (which
>> has ASF mentors in most all cases) so a veto role by the IPMC seems
>> to have minimum danger to the ASF system of checks and balances.>
>=20
> Yes, but the whole point of Incubation is that a podling is not yet a
> project.  Only Apache PMCs have the authority to make a release, thus
> only IPMC votes count.  On one hand this must feel incredibly =
annoying.
> On the other hand, it is the #1 reason we have the ASF as a =
corporation
> - to prevent the individual release manager from potentially getting
> sued *personally* for problems with the release.
>=20
> The fact that we have these documented policies, and that the board =
and
> IPMC enforces them means that legally, releases are acts of the
> Foundation.  Thus if anyone ever were to sue, they'd sue the =
Foundation
> (which has insurance and legal counsel) and not individual committers.
>=20
> --=20
>=20
> - Shane, IPMC Member
>  https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/resources
>=20

I completely agree with Shane. To put it another way, podlings don=E2=80=99=
t make releases, the IPMC makes releases.

In the past I=E2=80=99ve seen others advocate that one active mentor is =
enough for a podling. I do not share that opinion and think release =
voting is another reason a podling should aim (notice I=E2=80=99m not =
saying =E2=80=9Cmust=E2=80=9D here) to have at least three mentors. =
Mentors, by virtue of being more intimately involved with a podling, are =
much more likely to vote on a release than non-mentor IPMC members.

To address the low level of IPMC members voting on podling releases, we =
need to understand why it happens. Is it just a lack of individuals=E2=80=99=
 time? Is it that IPMC members expect a podling=E2=80=99s mentors to =
review and vote on a release?

Historically I=E2=80=99ve tended toward the latter, but my thinking has =
changed over time. While podlings have an explicit set of mentors, the =
IPMC as a whole can be thought of as an informal set of mentors. =
Reviewing and voting on podling release candidates is one way for any =
IPMC member to help a podling whether a mentor or not.

-Taylor


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org