Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 13, 2019, at 2:39 AM, Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>
> HI,
>
> I think there's a couple of misconceptions in this thread. First off
> currently you can join the IPMC two ways by being an ASF member and asking to
> join, the other by being voted in. On average the people being voted in tend
> to not go missing, review releases and sign off board reports more frequently.
>
> This has come up on list the list before and some (ex)board members have
> suggested that the IPMC shouldn’t;t allow people to be added this way.
>
> The suggestion here isn’t to be exclusionary, in fact we now allow people who
> have experience in incubator to ask if they can join, as it often hard for
> the IPMC to recognise merit, but they still need to be voted in. [1] When a
> project graduates I go though the PMC list and see if there are any likely
> IPMC candidates and contact them to see if they are interested, you’ll notice
> that more people have been voted in in recent times. In another thread I’ve
> gone one step further and suggested that mentors look out for people on their
> projects list who are release managers and vote on releases and suggest they
> be voted in as IPMC members. [2] (Option D). I agree the bar should be low.
>
> I do find it strange that we would allow people from a privileged group to
> auto join, when they possibly may not have shown merit and/or have not being
> involved in the incubator or an incubating project before. Obviously this
> doesn’t apply to all ASF members that ask join the incubator, but I can point
> to examples where this has given rise to serious issues. We’ve even had the
> occasional mentor who has never sent an email to their podlings list, never
> voted on a release and never signed off a board report.
This is a different problem. I’ve seen nonmember mentors who were voted in who
never really do anything. Let’s face it life intrudes in one way or another.
One hopes that such mentors will resign, but they usually fade away.
Let’s focus on service to podlings and try to replace mentors who for whatever
reason cannot help.
Following through with your proposal creates an IPMC that is not fully trusting
the Membership. The membership of The ASF is the Foundation. These people have
attained merit.
>
> I don’t mind if their's not consensus on this and letting this stay. There
> may be better ways to make sure mentors who sign up do their job and make
> mentors are more engaged. Please post your suggestions to this list for
> discussion.
I reject the use of the verb “make” for this problem. We should “help” mentors
and podling communities “be” more engaged. We should “help” podlings and
mentors when Incubation is not working.
Mentoring is voluntary. So is Membership.
We need to have strong Champions who know how to bring willing and able
podlings and mentors into the Incubator.
Regards,
Dave
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
> 1.
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9ee3860bc9066ba682484542d34976ab21d9b62106f26a96f19d997f@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> 2.https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/8c6e12bb040856dddb5d9b7b4821739e441455f3c61c6e469eb98f81@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
