I just added a patch to the readme and to add me to the members list. Perfectly OK if the patch is rejected. I can see both sides of this. I just want to be very careful not to encourage too much private discussion and "community adjustment" happening without visibility or input of community members beyond the PMC.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/COMDEV/issues/COMDEV-542?filter=allopenissues I will start a new md for use cases and include it in another patch. Phil On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 9:18 AM Rich Bowen <rbo...@rcbowen.com> wrote: > > > On Feb 12, 2024, at 10:57 AM, tison <wander4...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Thank you for starting this discussion, Rich. > > > > I'm trying to get the points of this WG: > > > > 1. This WG is NOT a new office to "shepherd" TLPs, but to write down > > how any community member can help in sharpening an ASF project. > > 2. For applying any suggestions, the request is delegated to the > > Board, Trademarks, or other offices in the case; a member of this WG > > can be an accountable assistant. > > > > > Well … yes and no. Ideally, a Sharpener will work with the PMC, offer them > advice, and the PMC will act on that advice. One hopes that very little, if > anything, is ever actually escalated to the Board or other officers. > > One of the big complaints about the Board is that it only has a big hammer > - that is to say, the Board doesn’t do nuance. Once something reaches the > Board, chances are something big is going to happen. And we want to avoid > that. We want to discover, and address problems, long before they become > problems. > > Anything that the Sharpener does, literally any member *could* do, but by > creating a process/structure around this, I hope to > > * Make it more acceptable to projects (ie, it’s not personal, this is here > to help us improve) > * Make it easier for members to get involved in doing this (ie, give > permission) > * Reduce the number of escalations to the Board (ie, solve problems before > they occur) > > > > So, the main work items of this WG are shaping how any community > > member can "supervise" an ASF project and how to collaborate with > > offices to get TLPs to work well. Also, "ensure" that such guidances > > are put into work. > > > I am very intentionally trying to avoid words like “supervise.” We are > coming alongside, and mentoring. We are not in a position of authority. The > very first Value I stated was that the project has a right to decline. > > > > > If so, I'd recall my previous comment as an Incubator mentor that: > > > >>> As a podling mentor, I know that many podlings join the ASF by > influences from other TLPs. So if the TLP violates our policies, it > increases the friction when we help the podlings to comply with our > policies. > > > > I already worked with trademarks@ to spot and fix issues on a few > > TLPs' content. I'm glad to join this WG to share my experience > > contributing to well-formed guidance. > > Excellent. I look forward to collaborating with you on this. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org > >
