On Feb 3, 2012, at 6:05 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 2/3/2012 7:40 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: >> >>> My interest goes beyond any of those topics, though. Incubator is very >>> tedious. Very little is resolved. Deck chairs are shuffled. But at >>> the end of the day, projects don't have ownership of their code, many >>> micro-managers do, we aren't necessarily creating better projects than >>> Chris's proposed structure, and the entire process and participation is >>> simply not enjoyable (except to the sadists or masochists). >> >> As Ross said, while the proposal gets rid of the tediousness it also removes >> much of the oversight and practically all of the help and support. > > One of my problems is that most of the biggest fans of micromanagement > and endless debate here at incubator spend nearly no time looking over > the graduated projects throughout the foundation to ensure they are > being overseen. If that doesn't happen, the ASF will suffer the death > of 1000 fractures. > > This proposal suggests that every project throughout the ASF needs the > support of the ASF's members, that incubating projects simply need to > pay extra attentions to each and every one of those requirements at > first, in order to prove they are likely to succeed. Then they can > move on to operating as a full TLP, going back to the very same resources > they enjoyed during their incubation during the rough patches.
Your statement above could just as easily be applied to having each podling be a subproject of the IPMC (as it is today), but be given the authority and responsibility they are missing today. You don't need to blow away the IPMC to fix this problem. Ralph --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
