Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity On 15 Jun 2013 16:53, "Alan Cabrera" <a...@toolazydogs.com> wrote: > > > Problem: podlings are confused on where to go when there's a problem. > > Cause: we seem to collect/handle/organize problems in an ad hoc manner and sometimes mentors are the problem. > > Solution: we create an elected Incubator Ombudsman.
>From now on I'm only going to look at solutions in the context of the issues on the wiki page. If a proposal doesn't apply to one or more issues I'm not interested. In this case... The only problem that would need an ombudsmen is ISSUE 01 (inactive mentors). Mentors should always know where to go to solve a problem (we have specialist committees for pretty much every issue that will arise). If mentors are inactive then ISSUE 01 is in play. The current place to go is the IPMC. At this point ISSUE 03 may well come into play. The idea of an Ombudsman overlaps with my earlier proposal for a psuedo-board in the IPMC. Its also similar to both suggested solutions for ISSUE 03 in the wiki. For these reasons I suggest the Ombudsmen proposal has merit. I also suggest that this ombudsmen could be the organisation responsible for acting if a podling (or a pTLP, if the experiment shows merit in this model) is failing. As always the details needs to be ironed out but since the proposal directly addresses ISSUE 03 I would like to see it explored. I especially like that it complements my pTLP experiment which is designed to address ISSUE 01 (but clearly your proposal is worth exploring even without that potential advantage). Ross > > > Regards, > Alan > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >
