Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
On 7/13/06, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kenneth Tam wrote: http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Roles_and_Responsibilities.html A Mentor is a role undertaken by a permanent member of the Apache Software Foundation and is chosen by the Sponsor to actively lead in the discharge of their duties (listed above). We still haven't fixed that doc? Ok, rhetorical. We need to fix that doc. What do you mean fix the doc? Is it not the policy that mentors be members? I've seen and been involved in discussions where this was used as a reason that non-members could not be mentors of an incubating project. For all the times I've been referred to the docs on the Apache website for policies of this nature, and in fact, this policy in particular, this is a pretty big discrepancy. When did this policy change? Bruce -- perl -e 'print unpack(u30,D0G)[EMAIL PROTECTED]5R\F)R=6-E+G-N61ED\!G;6%I;\YC;VT* );' Apache Geronimo - http://geronimo.apache.org/ Apache ActiveMQ - http://incubator.apache.org/activemq/ Apache ServiceMix - http://incubator.apache.org/servicemix/ Castor - http://castor.org/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
On Jul 13, 2006, at 10:49 PM, Ted Leung wrote: On Jul 13, 2006, at 7:16 PM, David Blevins wrote: In the ASF we do have PMC Chairs, period. Now let's say, someone wins this debate on wether or not having a PMC Chair from inside or outside the project is more or less likely to result in dependence. I'm not of the opinion that we shouldn't be removing temptations or confusing dualities of the ASF while projects are in the incubator only for these projects to struggle with them after graduation. Actually on the projects that I have previously mentored, we had PPMCs. We did not have a PMC chair until the project graduated. So we are discussing whether having a chair for the PPMC is a good idea or not, and and my thinking on this was it would be good practice.But now I am starting to think that maybe the good practice that is needed is how to work without a chair or official leader. If you put that person in from the start, then there is never an opportunity to learn that you can function without that person. Ok, I see. Hmm... going to have to think about that. I have the gut feeling there is something we can do to marry these concerns, as my primary concern is how the incubation ends. I.e. I think there should be an opportunity before incubation ends to learn to function *with* that person and someone in the project to learn to *be* that person. -David - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
Bruce Snyder wrote: What do you mean fix the doc? Is it not the policy that mentors be members? I've seen and been involved in discussions where this was used as a reason that non-members could not be mentors of an incubating project. Mentors are (MUST BE) Incubator PMC Members. ASF Members are automatically eligible for PMC membership; non-Members may be elected at the discretion of the Incubator PMC. The Incubator PMC is understandably selective, but we have had non-Members as Mentors, more than once. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
On 7/14/06, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bruce Snyder wrote: What do you mean fix the doc? Is it not the policy that mentors be members? I've seen and been involved in discussions where this was used as a reason that non-members could not be mentors of an incubating project. Mentors are (MUST BE) Incubator PMC Members. ASF Members are automatically eligible for PMC membership; non-Members may be elected at the discretion of the Incubator PMC. The Incubator PMC is understandably selective, but we have had non-Members as Mentors, more than once. Clear as mud. Bruce -- perl -e 'print unpack(u30,D0G)[EMAIL PROTECTED]5R\F)R=6-E+G-N61ED\!G;6%I;\YC;VT* );' Apache Geronimo - http://geronimo.apache.org/ Apache ActiveMQ - http://incubator.apache.org/activemq/ Apache ServiceMix - http://incubator.apache.org/servicemix/ Castor - http://castor.org/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
Sorry, I can't resist... On Jul 14, 2006, at 1:14 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote: ASF Members are automatically eligible for PMC membership; non-Members may be elected at the discretion of the Incubator PMC. with-big-grin This is some of that non-hierarchical, peer-based stuff you were talking about, right? :) /with-big-grin -David /me owes Noel a non-alcoholic beer - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
On Jul 14, 2006, at 10:51 AM, David Blevins wrote: I have the gut feeling there is something we can do to marry these concerns, as my primary concern is how the incubation ends. I.e. I think there should be an opportunity before incubation ends to learn to function *with* that person and someone in the project to learn to *be* that person. Assuming we decide to start ppmcs with a chair, there's no reason you couldn't start with one of the mentors as the chair and make it an objective to exit with one of the incubated committers as the chair. Ted - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
Ted Leung wrote: On Jul 14, 2006, at 10:51 AM, David Blevins wrote: Assuming we decide to start ppmcs with a chair, there's no reason you couldn't start with one of the mentors as the chair and make it an objective to exit with one of the incubated committers as the chair. Given that I know nothing about project X I'm mentoring, but that we don't know who of the project X community would be a good choice to step up, yes. I would be happy on one of my pure-mentorship projects to act as their chair, gently nudge people into making consensus decisions, etc etc, and then as a group we determine that Joe would make a fine chair. The trickier bit is when Sam wouldn't make a fine chain because he's too damned opinionated and can't set that aside with his chairman hat on. That's the sort of social dynamic best fleshed out while the project is *still* in incubation. I don't want a project to *graduate* with a mentor as chair (unless said mentor is staying with the effort). Better that the entire unit shows that it acts as an ASF project when we give it the good asfkeeping seal. Bill - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
On Jul 12, 2006, at 1:39 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote: On 7/11/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip (And I'll note now that I'm interested in participating, although can't commit the time to be a mentor right now.) this seems like a good opportunity to reintroduce an existing issue ( http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 200607.mbox/% [EMAIL PROTECTED]) under a better heading :-) the incubator seems to be moving to favouring more mentors. this works better in many ways: it gives an initial ppmc a builtin quruom and provides better oversight. the role of a solo mentor has traditionally been difficult and has consumed a lot of energy. multiple mentors would allow wider participation (without some of the current worries about mentors becoming overstretched by working on too many projects). but this approach may lead to problems if none of the mentors actually have enough consistent energy to devote to the podling. i've been wondering whether the answer may be to have a chair for each ppmc analogous to the role of the pmc chair. the initial pmc would be composed of the mentors for the podling and so a chair would need to be elected from within their number. at least one mentor would therefore need to commit to devote the energy required to perform this role. they would also form the first point of contact for the incubator pmc. This was addressed by the board a few months ago, where we admitted that having several Mentors could make sense, but that there needed to be one Mentor which was tasked with the position of being the, for lack of a better term, primary mentor. This was relayed to the Incubator PMC. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
Jim Jagielski wrote: This was addressed by the board a few months ago, where we admitted that having several Mentors could make sense, but that there needed to be one Mentor which was tasked with the position of being the, for lack of a better term, primary mentor. This was relayed to the Incubator PMC. Right. PPMC's are subcommittees. It's up to the Incubator PMC to determine how subcommittees under that umbrella are organized. I think it's silly to insist that the PPMC chair is a PMC member; although I can appreciate why, in many cases, it will start that way. But the idea would be to provide the PPMC members the mentoring in both how-we-do-code, and how-we-manage-projects. Letting one of the more management/detail oriented original participants 'drive', in the sense of an ASF project chair, makes alot of sense. They are replaceable (and the Incubator PMC would vote to accept the suggested replacement or find one, if none is suggested) and actively mentored (something that doesn't happen once the project's graduated.) If Incubator is training wheels for a full blown ASF project, then we should be teaching them to ride the 'pmc chair' bicycle as well? Bill - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
On 7/13/06, David Blevins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe you'd start with one of the mentors as chair then, maybe half way through incubation, start grooming a new ppmc chair from within the project. +1 This addresses my concern about formally identifying the mentor who is taking the key responsibility for the podling (rather than three rarely available mentors with no one of them taking responsibility). It also allows this mentor to demonstrate the role of a chair, particularly during the beginning of the project when the project could use help with both community processes and logistics. And I definitely agree with the idea of handing off that role during incubation to one of the committers as soon as one of them as got the idea. Cliff - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
i think the idea of training a chair during incubation is a great idea. Would have been good for felix. but, to do much of the work of a chair, they need access to things like iclas.txt and svn auth.. Would a non member chair of an incubating project get access there? Would it be appropriate? Upayavira -Original Message- From: Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subj: Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator] Date: Thu 13 Jul 2006 21:40 Size: 2K To: general@incubator.apache.org Cliff Schmidt wrote: On 7/13/06, David Blevins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe you'd start with one of the mentors as chair then, maybe half way through incubation, start grooming a new ppmc chair from within the project. +1 This addresses my concern about formally identifying the mentor who is taking the key responsibility for the podling (rather than three rarely available mentors with no one of them taking responsibility). It also allows this mentor to demonstrate the role of a chair, particularly during the beginning of the project when the project could use help with both community processes and logistics. And I definitely agree with the idea of handing off that role during incubation to one of the committers as soon as one of them as got the idea. I just want to note that we don't have a requirement that chairs be members. I thought I recalled a rule that mentors had to be members, but I can't quickly find confirmation of that. In any case, I don't have a problem with us ENDING UP at the point where a successfully incubated project has a non-member chair, but STARTING OUT at a point where somebody potentially new to the ASF is handed the role and basically told go mentor yourself seems kinda odd. A more concrete example to nail this down: Dims and I are listed as mentors of Tuscany, but I doubt either of us expect to be the ultimate chair (I certainly don't!), and I wouldn't want to make any of the current participants into a chair or chair like role just yet. The fact that role of ASF chair is not one of technical leadership is something that takes many people time to appreciate, and interjecting that confusion into the incubation process at this point would make things more difficult. Now each project is different. I can imagine other cases where this could work. And even with Tuscany, I can imagine handing off the chair role to somebody during incubation and letting them take ownership (with Dims and I as monitors/meta-mentors/safety-nets). - Sam Ruby - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
Cliff Schmidt wrote: This addresses my concern about formally identifying the mentor who is taking the key responsibility for the podling (rather than three rarely available mentors with no one of them taking responsibility). The problem isn't the lack of a single mentor, it is the failing of the three. What we really want are active mentors. It also allows this mentor to demonstrate the role of a chair How hard is it to understand that the PMC Chair has no role (slight hyperbole)? If the PMC Chair is a visible role, the community is already in trouble. The only role that a PMC Chair normally fills is getting the quarterly report filed. And this is why I feel strongly that we are discussing the wrong thing to do. Projects should not be trained to rely upon an individual; they should be trained to act collaboratively. Yes, I understand that it just feels so much safer to have someone in authority to point to --- hence the whole thing with the Golden Calf --- but that's not the way the ASF works. It only works that way as a safety net for when when things go bad. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
On Jul 13, 2006, at 1:40 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: I just want to note that we don't have a requirement that chairs be members. I thought I recalled a rule that mentors had to be members, but I can't quickly find confirmation of that. Yep, I was the XML PMC chair for several years and not a member. I do think that we said that mentors have to be members, but Im in the same boat as you on finding it. Ted - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Roles_and_Responsibilities.html A Mentor is a role undertaken by a permanent member of the Apache Software Foundation and is chosen by the Sponsor to actively lead in the discharge of their duties (listed above). On 7/13/06, Ted Leung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jul 13, 2006, at 1:40 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: I just want to note that we don't have a requirement that chairs be members. I thought I recalled a rule that mentors had to be members, but I can't quickly find confirmation of that. Yep, I was the XML PMC chair for several years and not a member. I do think that we said that mentors have to be members, but Im in the same boat as you on finding it. Ted - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
On Jul 13, 2006, at 5:41 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote: How hard is it to understand that the PMC Chair has no role (slight hyperbole)? If the PMC Chair is a visible role, the community is already in trouble. The only role that a PMC Chair normally fills is getting the quarterly report filed. And this is why I feel strongly that we are discussing the wrong thing to do. I don't know that I agree completely with you about the role of PMC Chairs - sometimes a good PMC chair helps a project quite a bit Projects should not be trained to rely upon an individual; they should be trained to act collaboratively. This is a very convincing argument to me, especially since people without open source experience are already trained to look for who's in charge. Count me as mulling it over some more Ted - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
Kenneth Tam wrote: http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Roles_and_Responsibilities.html A Mentor is a role undertaken by a permanent member of the Apache Software Foundation and is chosen by the Sponsor to actively lead in the discharge of their duties (listed above). We still haven't fixed that doc? Ok, rhetorical. We need to fix that doc. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
On 7/13/06, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cliff Schmidt wrote: It also allows this mentor to demonstrate the role of a chair How hard is it to understand that the PMC Chair has no role (slight hyperbole)? Then I guess I would have to ask you, how hard is it to understand that the PMC chair does, in fact, have a very specific role?. Section 6.3 of our bylaws describes that specific role. If the PMC Chair is a visible role, the community is already in trouble. The only role that a PMC Chair normally fills is getting the quarterly report filed. And this is why I feel strongly that we are discussing the wrong thing to do. I must be misunderstanding something about what you are saying, because I can think of a few things that you have done as Incubator PMC Chair that has been more than filing reports...and I've been glad you've done such things. Projects should not be trained to rely upon an individual; they should be trained to act collaboratively. I completely agree, but I've found a good PMC chair to be very helpful to guiding the rest of PMC on process issues, among other things. I guess we've had different experiences in our years of participating and chairing PMCs. Cliff - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
On Jul 13, 2006, at 5:49 PM, Ted Leung wrote: On Jul 13, 2006, at 5:41 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote: How hard is it to understand that the PMC Chair has no role (slight hyperbole)? If the PMC Chair is a visible role, the community is already in trouble. The only role that a PMC Chair normally fills is getting the quarterly report filed. And this is why I feel strongly that we are discussing the wrong thing to do. I don't know that I agree completely with you about the role of PMC Chairs - sometimes a good PMC chair helps a project quite a bit Projects should not be trained to rely upon an individual; they should be trained to act collaboratively. Who can't agree with that statement. But we're not debating that and it's true regardless of who is the PMC Chair. This is a very convincing argument to me, especially since people without open source experience are already trained to look for who's in charge. It's just not a useful argument for one way or the other. One could just as easily assert that a new group of individuals with no experience in the ASF would view an ASF appointed PMC Chair as an authority figure, especially when this person would know so much more about the organization than they do. In the ASF we do have PMC Chairs, period. Now let's say, someone wins this debate on wether or not having a PMC Chair from inside or outside the project is more or less likely to result in dependence. I'm not of the opinion that we shouldn't be removing temptations or confusing dualities of the ASF while projects are in the incubator only for these projects to struggle with them after graduation. Projects in the Incubator should be encouraged to try and *fail* over and over again till they get it. -David - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
Ted Leung wrote: I don't know that I agree completely with you about the role of PMC Chairs - sometimes a good PMC chair helps a project quite a bit As the Chair? Or as a recognized leader by his or her peers based upon the weight of experience and ideas, rather than the official role? I'm banking on the latter. Projects should not be trained to rely upon an individual; they should be trained to act collaboratively. This is a very convincing argument to me, especially since people without open source experience are already trained to look for who's in charge. In fact, one long-time PMC Chair (no longer one) has opined that a PMC Chair should not participate in discussions because whenever the PMC Chair participates, it is the role that is perceived as participating, rather than the individual. Other people have commented that they realize that they are growing within the ASF when they are comfortable disagreeing with one of the big-names, and some of the same big-names have commented that they respect people more when they do just that, because so few people do. I, obviously, disagree with the idea that a PMC Chair should be a non-participant, but I do agree that helping to train people to perceive people and their ideas, not the roles they hold (or the reputation of their name), is an important part of what we should be doing. Everyone should feel that they have as much right to speak up as anyone else, and that what matters in the end are the ideas that we bring forth, and our collorative actions to bring them to fruition. Not who we are, nor what (legal) role we hold. Count me as mulling it over some more. In an ironic riposte regarding using IRC, a number of us had this discussion on IRC in mid-March. I could ask permission from the participants to post the ~50KB log of that discussion from a members only channel, but instead I will commit to redacting the overall content in a fashion suitable for posting here. This proves, once again, that if we don't document our history, we are condemned to repeat it. :-) --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
On Jul 13, 2006, at 7:16 PM, David Blevins wrote: In the ASF we do have PMC Chairs, period. Now let's say, someone wins this debate on wether or not having a PMC Chair from inside or outside the project is more or less likely to result in dependence. I'm not of the opinion that we shouldn't be removing temptations or confusing dualities of the ASF while projects are in the incubator only for these projects to struggle with them after graduation. Actually on the projects that I have previously mentored, we had PPMCs. We did not have a PMC chair until the project graduated. So we are discussing whether having a chair for the PPMC is a good idea or not, and and my thinking on this was it would be good practice.But now I am starting to think that maybe the good practice that is needed is how to work without a chair or official leader. If you put that person in from the start, then there is never an opportunity to learn that you can function without that person. Ted - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
robert burrell donkin wrote: On 7/11/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip (And I'll note now that I'm interested in participating, although can't commit the time to be a mentor right now.) this seems like a good opportunity to reintroduce an existing issue ( http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/200607.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]) under a better heading :-) the incubator seems to be moving to favouring more mentors. this works better in many ways: it gives an initial ppmc a builtin quruom and provides better oversight. the role of a solo mentor has traditionally been difficult and has consumed a lot of energy. multiple mentors would allow wider participation (without some of the current worries about mentors becoming overstretched by working on too many projects). but this approach may lead to problems if none of the mentors actually have enough consistent energy to devote to the podling. i've been wondering whether the answer may be to have a chair for each ppmc analogous to the role of the pmc chair. the initial pmc would be composed of the mentors for the podling and so a chair would need to be elected from within their number. at least one mentor would therefore need to commit to devote the energy required to perform this role. they would also form the first point of contact for the incubator pmc. opinions? +1 - Sam Ruby - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
On 12.07.2006, at 19:39, robert burrell donkin wrote: On 7/11/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip (And I'll note now that I'm interested in participating, although can't commit the time to be a mentor right now.) this seems like a good opportunity to reintroduce an existing issue ( http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 200607.mbox/% [EMAIL PROTECTED]) under a better heading :-) the incubator seems to be moving to favouring more mentors. this works better in many ways: it gives an initial ppmc a builtin quruom and provides better oversight. the role of a solo mentor has traditionally been difficult and has consumed a lot of energy. multiple mentors would allow wider participation (without some of the current worries about mentors becoming overstretched by working on too many projects). but this approach may lead to problems if none of the mentors actually have enough consistent energy to devote to the podling. i've been wondering whether the answer may be to have a chair for each ppmc analogous to the role of the pmc chair. the initial pmc would be composed of the mentors for the podling and so a chair would need to be elected from within their number. at least one mentor would therefore need to commit to devote the energy required to perform this role. they would also form the first point of contact for the incubator pmc. opinions? I really like that so +1 (although I think it'll be hard for some podlings to learn another role; heck, if they can't figure out this one, they don't belong here anyway :-P). Cheers, Erik smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
+1.. Mvgr, Martin robert burrell donkin wrote: On 7/11/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip (And I'll note now that I'm interested in participating, although can't commit the time to be a mentor right now.) this seems like a good opportunity to reintroduce an existing issue ( http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/200607.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]) under a better heading :-) the incubator seems to be moving to favouring more mentors. this works better in many ways: it gives an initial ppmc a builtin quruom and provides better oversight. the role of a solo mentor has traditionally been difficult and has consumed a lot of energy. multiple mentors would allow wider participation (without some of the current worries about mentors becoming overstretched by working on too many projects). but this approach may lead to problems if none of the mentors actually have enough consistent energy to devote to the podling. i've been wondering whether the answer may be to have a chair for each ppmc analogous to the role of the pmc chair. the initial pmc would be composed of the mentors for the podling and so a chair would need to be elected from within their number. at least one mentor would therefore need to commit to devote the energy required to perform this role. they would also form the first point of contact for the incubator pmc. opinions? - robert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
I like the idea. so +1 (non-binding) but how should that really work? snip Each incubator project could have nominated two or three PMC members whose job is to pay attention to the project. /snip How does a podling know which to nominate etc? The need for that is there, of course. I try to do the best I can (as committer and my Apache background) to help on the adffaces (trinidad) podling. Some questions are still there. Mostly I ask this list on it. Thanks, Matthias On 7/12/06, Martin van den Bemt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +1.. Mvgr, Martin robert burrell donkin wrote: On 7/11/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip (And I'll note now that I'm interested in participating, although can't commit the time to be a mentor right now.) this seems like a good opportunity to reintroduce an existing issue ( http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/200607.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]) under a better heading :-) the incubator seems to be moving to favouring more mentors. this works better in many ways: it gives an initial ppmc a builtin quruom and provides better oversight. the role of a solo mentor has traditionally been difficult and has consumed a lot of energy. multiple mentors would allow wider participation (without some of the current worries about mentors becoming overstretched by working on too many projects). but this approach may lead to problems if none of the mentors actually have enough consistent energy to devote to the podling. i've been wondering whether the answer may be to have a chair for each ppmc analogous to the role of the pmc chair. the initial pmc would be composed of the mentors for the podling and so a chair would need to be elected from within their number. at least one mentor would therefore need to commit to devote the energy required to perform this role. they would also form the first point of contact for the incubator pmc. opinions? - robert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
Erik Abele wrote: On 12.07.2006, at 19:39, robert burrell donkin wrote: On 7/11/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip (And I'll note now that I'm interested in participating, although can't commit the time to be a mentor right now.) this seems like a good opportunity to reintroduce an existing issue ( http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/200607.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]) under a better heading :-) the incubator seems to be moving to favouring more mentors. this works better in many ways: it gives an initial ppmc a builtin quruom and provides better oversight. the role of a solo mentor has traditionally been difficult and has consumed a lot of energy. multiple mentors would allow wider participation (without some of the current worries about mentors becoming overstretched by working on too many projects). but this approach may lead to problems if none of the mentors actually have enough consistent energy to devote to the podling. i've been wondering whether the answer may be to have a chair for each ppmc analogous to the role of the pmc chair. the initial pmc would be composed of the mentors for the podling and so a chair would need to be elected from within their number. at least one mentor would therefore need to commit to devote the energy required to perform this role. they would also form the first point of contact for the incubator pmc. opinions? I really like that so +1 (although I think it'll be hard for some podlings to learn another role; heck, if they can't figure out this one, they don't belong here anyway :-P). Ditto! +1 Alex - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
On 7/12/06, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 7/11/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip (And I'll note now that I'm interested in participating, although can't commit the time to be a mentor right now.) this seems like a good opportunity to reintroduce an existing issue ( http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/200607.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]) under a better heading :-) the incubator seems to be moving to favouring more mentors. this works better in many ways: it gives an initial ppmc a builtin quruom and provides better oversight. the role of a solo mentor has traditionally been difficult and has consumed a lot of energy. multiple mentors would allow wider participation (without some of the current worries about mentors becoming overstretched by working on too many projects). but this approach may lead to problems if none of the mentors actually have enough consistent energy to devote to the podling. i've been wondering whether the answer may be to have a chair for each ppmc analogous to the role of the pmc chair. the initial pmc would be composed of the mentors for the podling and so a chair would need to be elected from within their number. at least one mentor would therefore need to commit to devote the energy required to perform this role. they would also form the first point of contact for the incubator pmc. This sounds good to me, unless you are implying that the ppmc would only include mentor-types and not all interested committers. Can't tell from what you've written above, but I've heard others talk about how to select a ppmc, as if it wasn't open to all committers, and I think it should be open. But, to your main point -- I have always favored either one dedicated mentor or one of the mentors being identified as the primary one -- so I like your 'ppmc chair = dedicated mentor' idea. Cliff - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Mentors - the more, the merrier? [WAS Re: [VOTE] Accept Heraldry into the Incubator]
robert burrell donkin wrote: i've been wondering whether the answer may be to have a chair for each ppmc analogous to the role of the pmc chair. I strongly disagree. Although history documents an unfortunately strong human tendency towards delegating to a hierarchical authority, the ASF philosophy is peer-based, not hierarchical. The PMC Chair is a legal requirement, not a community one, and a fallback in case of community failure. From the inception of the project, we want to instill in it the ASF philosophy of peer-based collaboration. Putting someone First Amongst Equals is the start of a road to excuses and dependence instead of collective responsiblity. I would prefer that we help indoctrinate people on taking collective responsibility. There is no day to day need for a PMC Chair role, and the two needs that a PMC Chair fulfills are perforce handled by the Incubator PMC Chair. at least one mentor would therefore need to commit to devote the energy required to perform this role. The PPMC is collectively responsible for the project, and should act accordingly. If one or another lacks the time to devote, he or she should communicate with the peers. If others see a need, they should communicate with the PPMC and/or the Incubator PMC as necessary. they would also form the first point of contact for the incubator pmc. Collectively, yes. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
