Re: Clarification of Mentors from Proposal Guide
Le 26 nov. 2016 23:40, "John D. Ament" a écrit : > > I blended Bertrand's improved form with the remaining information from that > section and got this... +1 to your proposed text. -Bertrand
Re: Clarification of Mentors from Proposal Guide
I blended Bertrand's improved form with the remaining information from that section and got this: Lists eligible (and willing) individuals nominated as Mentors [definition] for the candidate. Three Mentors gives a quorum and allows a Podling more autonomy from the Incubator PMC, so the current consensus is that three Mentors is a good number. Any experienced Apache community member can provide informal mentorship anyway, what's important is to make sure the podling has enough regularly available mentors to progress smoothly. There is no restriction on the number of mentors, formal or informal, a Podling may have. "Three Mentors" is a link to participation.html#mentors "Incubator PMC" is a link to incubation/Roles_and_Responsibilities.html#Incubator+Project+Management+Committee+%28PMC%29 WDYT? On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 5:14 PM Greg Stein wrote: > On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 9:16 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz < > bdelacre...@apache.org > > wrote: > >... > > > I suggest replacing both paragraphs that you list by this, or a > > refined variant of it: > > > > "Three Mentors gives a quorum and allows a Podling more autonomy, so the > > current > > consensus is that three Mentors is a good number. Any experienced > > Apache community > > member can provide informal mentorship anyway, what's important is to > make > > sure > > the podling has enough regularly available mentors to progress smoothly." > > > > Right. You don't have to be a Mentor, official or otherwise, to help a > podling. JFDI and don't worry too much about the label. (and if you're an > IPMC member, you can vote on behalf of the PPMC regardless of the Mentor > label) > > Cheers, > -g >
Re: Clarification of Mentors from Proposal Guide
On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 9:16 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: >... > I suggest replacing both paragraphs that you list by this, or a > refined variant of it: > > "Three Mentors gives a quorum and allows a Podling more autonomy, so the > current > consensus is that three Mentors is a good number. Any experienced > Apache community > member can provide informal mentorship anyway, what's important is to make > sure > the podling has enough regularly available mentors to progress smoothly." > Right. You don't have to be a Mentor, official or otherwise, to help a podling. JFDI and don't worry too much about the label. (and if you're an IPMC member, you can vote on behalf of the PPMC regardless of the Mentor label) Cheers, -g
Re: Clarification of Mentors from Proposal Guide
On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 7:16 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 3:05 PM, John D. Ament > wrote: > > ...*Note that since Mentors are appointed by the Incubator PMC at the > end of > > the acceptance process, they have no formal role until the proposal is > > accepted > > I don't think this is really useful, it seems to just cover edge cases > that we might as well explain on list if they happen. > > I suggest replacing both paragraphs that you list by this, or a > refined variant of it: > > "Three Mentors gives a quorum and allows a Podling more autonomy, so the > current > consensus is that three Mentors is a good number. Any experienced > Apache community > member can provide informal mentorship anyway, what's important is to make > sure > the podling has enough regularly available mentors to progress smoothly." > And frankly, nobody really has a formal role until the proposal is accepted. That is the point of acceptance ... it is the beginning of formality. Before then, there are really no rules (from Apache).
Re: Clarification of Mentors from Proposal Guide
Hi, On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 3:05 PM, John D. Ament wrote: > ...*Note that since Mentors are appointed by the Incubator PMC at the end of > the acceptance process, they have no formal role until the proposal is > accepted I don't think this is really useful, it seems to just cover edge cases that we might as well explain on list if they happen. I suggest replacing both paragraphs that you list by this, or a refined variant of it: "Three Mentors gives a quorum and allows a Podling more autonomy, so the current consensus is that three Mentors is a good number. Any experienced Apache community member can provide informal mentorship anyway, what's important is to make sure the podling has enough regularly available mentors to progress smoothly." -Bertrand - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Clarification of Mentors from Proposal Guide
Right, to be 100% clear, the part that I'm saying should be removed is more around the "appointment" side not the role during proposal. Though I will say with the right mentors on board, seeing activity during the proposal process is not uncommon and usually a good thing. I actually missed the comma there thinking it was a period. ;-) John On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 10:01 AM Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: > I think practically mentors volunteer and the podling accept, IPMC does not > really need to decide on that. In the rare cases of many mentor volunteers > it may be useful for the Incubator community to guide the podling on which > mentors would be more beneficial, but then for the podling to pick rather > than IPMC (who?) to "appoint". In that sense IPMC just rubber stamp the > mentor list. > > The point of the paragraph is that it is the Champion and Incubator > community overall that guides at the proposal stage, not particularly the > nominee mentors (although usually now the champion is also one of the > mentors). So we can shorten the paragraph to just: > > > Mentors have no formal role until the proposal is accepted. > > And if a mentor comes along after acceptance, then I think it is enough for > the podling to accept that person, as long as they are on IPMC there is no > need to do any formal appointment beyond updating the right files. (an ASF > Member may ask to join IPMC first). > > On 25 Nov 2016 2:05 pm, "John D. Ament" wrote: > > > All, > > > > I was wondering if someone could help me clarify this block of text. > This > > is the section I believe is at an issue: > > > > http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html#template-mentors > > > > *It is common for additional Mentors to volunteer their services during > the > > development of the proposal. The number of Mentors for a Podling is > limited > > only by the energy and interest of those eligible to Mentor. Three > Mentors > > gives a quorum and allows a Podling more autonomy. The current consensus > is > > that three or more Mentors makes the incubation process run more > smoothly.* > > > > *Note that since Mentors are appointed by the Incubator PMC at the end of > > the acceptance process, they have no formal role until the proposal is > > accepted. But informal enthusiasm from nominee Mentors is taken as a good > > sign.* > > > > In the first paragraph, we're saying that Mentors volunteer. But the > > second paragraph states that they are appointed by the IPMC. I'm > inclined > > to just remove that first sentence from the proposal guide. Anyone > else's > > thoughts? > > > > John > > >
Re: Clarification of Mentors from Proposal Guide
I think practically mentors volunteer and the podling accept, IPMC does not really need to decide on that. In the rare cases of many mentor volunteers it may be useful for the Incubator community to guide the podling on which mentors would be more beneficial, but then for the podling to pick rather than IPMC (who?) to "appoint". In that sense IPMC just rubber stamp the mentor list. The point of the paragraph is that it is the Champion and Incubator community overall that guides at the proposal stage, not particularly the nominee mentors (although usually now the champion is also one of the mentors). So we can shorten the paragraph to just: > Mentors have no formal role until the proposal is accepted. And if a mentor comes along after acceptance, then I think it is enough for the podling to accept that person, as long as they are on IPMC there is no need to do any formal appointment beyond updating the right files. (an ASF Member may ask to join IPMC first). On 25 Nov 2016 2:05 pm, "John D. Ament" wrote: > All, > > I was wondering if someone could help me clarify this block of text. This > is the section I believe is at an issue: > > http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html#template-mentors > > *It is common for additional Mentors to volunteer their services during the > development of the proposal. The number of Mentors for a Podling is limited > only by the energy and interest of those eligible to Mentor. Three Mentors > gives a quorum and allows a Podling more autonomy. The current consensus is > that three or more Mentors makes the incubation process run more smoothly.* > > *Note that since Mentors are appointed by the Incubator PMC at the end of > the acceptance process, they have no formal role until the proposal is > accepted. But informal enthusiasm from nominee Mentors is taken as a good > sign.* > > In the first paragraph, we're saying that Mentors volunteer. But the > second paragraph states that they are appointed by the IPMC. I'm inclined > to just remove that first sentence from the proposal guide. Anyone else's > thoughts? > > John >
Clarification of Mentors from Proposal Guide
All, I was wondering if someone could help me clarify this block of text. This is the section I believe is at an issue: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html#template-mentors *It is common for additional Mentors to volunteer their services during the development of the proposal. The number of Mentors for a Podling is limited only by the energy and interest of those eligible to Mentor. Three Mentors gives a quorum and allows a Podling more autonomy. The current consensus is that three or more Mentors makes the incubation process run more smoothly.* *Note that since Mentors are appointed by the Incubator PMC at the end of the acceptance process, they have no formal role until the proposal is accepted. But informal enthusiasm from nominee Mentors is taken as a good sign.* In the first paragraph, we're saying that Mentors volunteer. But the second paragraph states that they are appointed by the IPMC. I'm inclined to just remove that first sentence from the proposal guide. Anyone else's thoughts? John
