On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 3:57 PM, Daniel Gruno <humbed...@apache.org> wrote: > > > On 2015-07-26 10:56, jan i wrote: >> >> No that is an important service, on the other hand I also agree that the >> mentors should be guiding/running the podlings not general@ >> >> Maybe we can find some middle ground. >> - Mentors "run" the podlings, can accept releases etc. >> - Mentors decide when a podlng can graduate (maybe with some form of, >> needs >> to accepted by all mentors of the project) >> - Any release must be announced (not voted) on general@, so that people >> like you have a chance of controlling it just like today. >> >> I think this would make incubator a lot more efficient, reduce our >> inboxes, >> and give us spare time to concentrate on other things. >> >> rgds >> jan i. > > This is somewhat similar to the 2013 alternate release policy we have, > whereby the first release has to do the initial IPMC clearance vote, but > subsequent releases only need the mentors' approval. I believe our current > policy is sound and has proven itself effective, as you can see by the many > times a new podling's release has been caught by the "policy watch dogs" we > have in the IPMC that specialize in reviewing material that is to be > released. > > Optionally, if we aim to 'save space in our inboxes', we could generate a > new group of people on a specific ML designed for initial release > verification, and all _first releases_ would go through that list and have > things checked, while only sending a NOTICE to the general incubator list on > successfully released software. > > I do not, however, think we should just scrap the current rule of having the > outside judge the initial release, as it has been shown, time after time, > that it really does help to have this external review.
I'd like to raise a somewhat orthogonal point. Mainly the fact that our obsession with doing good work with podlings could, very well, be obscuring a much more important issues. And given how limited our resources of eyeballs looking at releases are -- we need to be practical. Now, while I couldn't agree more that IP hygiene of releases is one of the corner stones of what makes ASF what it is, I have to be realistic in accepting the fact that once podling is out of the incubation and becomes a TLP the level of external scrutiny drops by 90% and all bets are off. Some TLPs do great releases. Some do really poor ones. Sometimes ppl notify the board. Once again, I can't be happier that there are folks like Justin who spend an enormous amount of their personal time helping to vet releases of podlings. I only ask: should his (and guys like him) time be better applied to helping foundation make sure that our TLPs are doing what they are supposed to do as well? Thanks, Roman. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
