Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Rob Weir]

I'd like to make sure that we're all on the same page with graduation
and how this process works.  The vote that is ongoing now is a vote by
the Incubation Project Management Committee (IPMC) on whether or not
to *recommend* graduation to the ASF Board.   So if this vote passes,
which looks likely, then we have this recommendation.  But we are not
graduated yet.  Only the ASF Board can create a Top Level Project.
And they don't meet until next Wednesday.

So please let's respect this distinction in our external
communications and avoid overstating the significance of the IPMC
recommendation vote.  This vote does not immediately cause us to
graduate.   The real news story, the one we will want to promote, will
be after next Wednesday's Board meeting.  So personally I will not be
sending out Tweets, etc., about the IPMC vote, since 140 characters is
not enough to make this important distinction.  I'll wait until after
the Board meeting.

Also, there are some administrative steps that we'll need to take care
of over the weekend, assuming the IPMC vote passes:

1) Sending a [VOTE][RESULTS] post to the IPMC list

2) Sending the proposed resolution to the board list per these
instructions:  
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#top-level-board-proposal

This probably needs to happen on Saturday, shortly after the 72-hour
PMC vote ends, if we are to get on the Board's agenda for Wednesday.
I'm assuming Andrea will take care of this, or delegate to someone
else if he is unavailable on Saturday.

-Rob

Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Issac Goldstand]

On 12/10/2012 15:52, Rob Weir wrote:

2) Sending the proposed resolution to the board list per these
instructions:  
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#top-level-board-proposal

This probably needs to happen on Saturday, shortly after the 72-hour
PMC vote ends, if we are to get on the Board's agenda for Wednesday.
I'm assuming Andrea will take care of this, or delegate to someone
else if he is unavailable on Saturday.
Remember that this needs to hit board@ by Sunday to be included in the 
agenda for Wednesday, so if there's no ack by midnight Saturday by 
Andrea that it's been dealt with, a backup voulenteer would probably be 
a smart thing :)


  Issac

Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Kay Schenk]

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 6:59 AM, Issac Goldstand  wrote:

> On 12/10/2012 15:52, Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> 2) Sending the proposed resolution to the board list per these
>> instructions:  http://incubator.apache.org/**guides/graduation.html#top-*
>> *level-board-proposal
>>
>> This probably needs to happen on Saturday, shortly after the 72-hour
>> PMC vote ends, if we are to get on the Board's agenda for Wednesday.
>> I'm assuming Andrea will take care of this, or delegate to someone
>> else if he is unavailable on Saturday.
>>
> Remember that this needs to hit board@ by Sunday to be included in the
> agenda for Wednesday, so if there's no ack by midnight Saturday by Andrea
> that it's been dealt with, a backup voulenteer would probably be a smart
> thing :)
>
>   Issac
>

@Rob...yes, we should not get ahead of ourselves. The Board's decision  at
the board meeting is the definitive one that will establish OpenOffice as a
TLP.

@Isaac...a backup would be a good idea and this person needs to be a
current PPMC member. As an FYI, a template for submission to the Board is
available on the Graduation page

http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#process

-- 

MzK

"Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never
 dealt  with a cat."
-- Robert Heinlein

Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Andrea Pescetti]

Rob Weir wrote:

Also, there are some administrative steps that we'll need to take care
of over the weekend, assuming the IPMC vote passes:
1) Sending a [VOTE][RESULTS] post to the IPMC list
2) Sending the proposed resolution to the board list per these
instructions:  
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#top-level-board-proposal
This probably needs to happen on Saturday, shortly after the 72-hour
PMC vote ends, if we are to get on the Board's agenda for Wednesday.
I'm assuming Andrea will take care of this, or delegate to someone


Exactly. Actually, both tasks are rather trivial, it will just need 
precise timing as others explained. But it won't be a problem for me to 
take care of it in about 24 hours.


As a minor update, the only observation we received so far (besides a 
substantial number of +1 votes, no abstentions or -1) was that almost 
all the proposed PMC members do not belong to other Apache projects; our 
mentors were asked if they perceived this as a problem, and we didn't 
get an answer from them so far.


Regards,
  Andrea.

Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Dave Fisher]

On Oct 12, 2012, at 9:02 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 6:59 AM, Issac Goldstand  wrote:
> 
>> On 12/10/2012 15:52, Rob Weir wrote:
>> 
>>> 2) Sending the proposed resolution to the board list per these
>>> instructions:  http://incubator.apache.org/**guides/graduation.html#top-*
>>> *level-board-proposal
>>> 
>>> This probably needs to happen on Saturday, shortly after the 72-hour
>>> PMC vote ends, if we are to get on the Board's agenda for Wednesday.
>>> I'm assuming Andrea will take care of this, or delegate to someone
>>> else if he is unavailable on Saturday.
>>> 
>> Remember that this needs to hit board@ by Sunday to be included in the
>> agenda for Wednesday, so if there's no ack by midnight Saturday by Andrea
>> that it's been dealt with, a backup voulenteer would probably be a smart
>> thing :)
>> 
>>  Issac
>> 
> 
> @Rob...yes, we should not get ahead of ourselves. The Board's decision  at
> the board meeting is the definitive one that will establish OpenOffice as a
> TLP.
> 
> @Isaac...a backup would be a good idea and this person needs to be a
> current PPMC member. As an FYI, a template for submission to the Board is
> available on the Graduation page
> 
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#process

That page may not be the exact..

The Incubator lists podlings for graduation on the Incubator's Board Report. 
(This is discussed on private @ i.a.o.)

Please ask on general @ i.a.o if any further action is required by this PPMC to 
put the resolution on the board agenda once the VOTE passes.

Regards,
Dave


> 
> -- 
> 
> MzK
> 
> "Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never
> dealt  with a cat."
>-- Robert Heinlein

Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Dave Fisher]

On Oct 12, 2012, at 10:28 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:

> Rob Weir wrote:
>> Also, there are some administrative steps that we'll need to take care
>> of over the weekend, assuming the IPMC vote passes:
>> 1) Sending a [VOTE][RESULTS] post to the IPMC list
>> 2) Sending the proposed resolution to the board list per these
>> instructions:  
>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#top-level-board-proposal
>> This probably needs to happen on Saturday, shortly after the 72-hour
>> PMC vote ends, if we are to get on the Board's agenda for Wednesday.
>> I'm assuming Andrea will take care of this, or delegate to someone
> 
> Exactly. Actually, both tasks are rather trivial, it will just need precise 
> timing as others explained. But it won't be a problem for me to take care of 
> it in about 24 hours.
> 
> As a minor update, the only observation we received so far (besides a 
> substantial number of +1 votes, no abstentions or -1) was that almost all the 
> proposed PMC members do not belong to other Apache projects; our mentors were 
> asked if they perceived this as a problem, and we didn't get an answer from 
> them so far.

The observation was from a board member. Three of the project mentors are also 
board members.

Joe voted +1 after Bertrand's remark.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> Regards,
>  Andrea.

Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Rob Weir]

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Andrea Pescetti  wrote:
> Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> Also, there are some administrative steps that we'll need to take care
>> of over the weekend, assuming the IPMC vote passes:
>> 1) Sending a [VOTE][RESULTS] post to the IPMC list
>> 2) Sending the proposed resolution to the board list per these
>> instructions:
>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#top-level-board-proposal
>> This probably needs to happen on Saturday, shortly after the 72-hour
>> PMC vote ends, if we are to get on the Board's agenda for Wednesday.
>> I'm assuming Andrea will take care of this, or delegate to someone
>
>
> Exactly. Actually, both tasks are rather trivial, it will just need precise
> timing as others explained. But it won't be a problem for me to take care of
> it in about 24 hours.
>
> As a minor update, the only observation we received so far (besides a
> substantial number of +1 votes, no abstentions or -1) was that almost all
> the proposed PMC members do not belong to other Apache projects; our mentors
> were asked if they perceived this as a problem, and we didn't get an answer
> from them so far.
>

Hmmm I think there are several PMC members who are involved with
other areas of Apache:

1) Don is involved with ConCom, as well as working with Sally on Press
and Communications.

2) Others, like Oliver, Louis, etc., have been active in the ApacheCon planning.

3) Andrew,  Juergen and Raphael have worked closely with Infra on many
things.  There may be others.

4) In general I think we're comfortable working with Trademarks and
Legal Affairs on an ongoing basis.  This includes raising questions
and getting advice, but some, like Dennis, are active sharing what
they have learned as well.

5) Dave is involved with POI.  Don and Juergen are also on the PMC of
the ODF Toolkit.  I think Pedro said he was getting involved with a
new BeanShell project proposal.

6) There was the work moving the SPI funds to Apache that involved
coordinating with ASF Treasurer.

So  I do not know whether it is accurate to say that no one but Dave
is "active in more than just the OO project".

-Rob

> Regards,
>   Andrea.

Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Pedro Giffuni]

- Original Message -
> From: Rob Weir 
...
>> 
>>  As a minor update, the only observation we received so far (besides a
>>  substantial number of +1 votes, no abstentions or -1) was that almost all
>>  the proposed PMC members do not belong to other Apache projects; our 
> mentors
>>  were asked if they perceived this as a problem, and we didn't get an 
> answer
>>  from them so far.
>> 
> 
> Hmmm I think there are several PMC members who are involved with
> other areas of Apache:
> 
> 1) Don is involved with ConCom, as well as working with Sally on Press
> and Communications.
> 
> 2) Others, like Oliver, Louis, etc., have been active in the ApacheCon 
> planning.
> 
> 3) Andrew,  Juergen and Raphael have worked closely with Infra on many
> things.  There may be others.
> 
> 4) In general I think we're comfortable working with Trademarks and
> Legal Affairs on an ongoing basis.  This includes raising questions
> and getting advice, but some, like Dennis, are active sharing what
> they have learned as well.
> 
> 5) Dave is involved with POI.  Don and Juergen are also on the PMC of
> the ODF Toolkit.  I think Pedro said he was getting involved with a
> new BeanShell project proposal.
> 
> 6) There was the work moving the SPI funds to Apache that involved
> coordinating with ASF Treasurer.
> 
> So  I do not know whether it is accurate to say that no one but Dave
> is "active in more than just the OO project".
> 

The above is all mostly unrelated. I do think we should have included
some of our mentors in the PMC.

This was a failure in the method we chose to determine the initial PMC:
we chose based on project visibility/popularity and by their function our
mentors have tried to remain with a low profile and intervene only when
it was absolutely necessary.

This is something relatively easy to fix though, let's hope it doesn't delay
us too much.

Pedro.

Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Dave Fisher]

On Oct 13, 2012, at 11:48 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> 
> - Original Message -
>> From: Rob Weir 
> ...
>>> 
>>> As a minor update, the only observation we received so far (besides a
>>> substantial number of +1 votes, no abstentions or -1) was that almost all
>>> the proposed PMC members do not belong to other Apache projects; our 
>> mentors
>>> were asked if they perceived this as a problem, and we didn't get an 
>> answer
>>> from them so far.
>>> 
>> 
>> Hmmm I think there are several PMC members who are involved with
>> other areas of Apache:
>> 
>> 1) Don is involved with ConCom, as well as working with Sally on Press
>> and Communications.

Don's efforts are visible.
>> 
>> 2) Others, like Oliver, Louis, etc., have been active in the ApacheCon 
>> planning.
>> 
>> 3) Andrew,  Juergen and Raphael have worked closely with Infra on many
>> things.  There may be others.

imacat as well.

All are visible.

>> 
>> 4) In general I think we're comfortable working with Trademarks and
>> Legal Affairs on an ongoing basis.  This includes raising questions
>> and getting advice, but some, like Dennis, are active sharing what
>> they have learned as well.
>> 
>> 5) Dave is involved with POI.

I was the exception that Bertrand was aware of - we are both Mentors to Apache 
Flex and I'm the only Member on the PMC.

>>   Don and Juergen are also on the PMC of
>> the ODF Toolkit. 

I am glad to see your recent attention to ODFToolkit where you are also a PPMC 
member.

>> I think Pedro said he was getting involved with a
>> new BeanShell project proposal.

I haven't seen that in the Incubator yet.

>> 
>> 6) There was the work moving the SPI funds to Apache that involved
>> coordinating with ASF Treasurer.
>> 
>> So  I do not know whether it is accurate to say that no one but Dave
>> is "active in more than just the OO project".
>>  
> 
> The above is all mostly unrelated. I do think we should have included
> some of our mentors in the PMC.

I agree.

> 
> This was a failure in the method we chose to determine the initial PMC:
> we chose based on project visibility/popularity and by their function our
> mentors have tried to remain with a low profile and intervene only when
> it was absolutely necessary.

There are several ways this may be fixed in no particular order or evaluation 
of likelihood.

(A) The Board might add PMC members.
(B) The new PMC might VOTE for new PMC members.
(C) Some PMC members might be elected Apache Members at the next Members 
meeting.

Only one of the above (B) is something that may be controlled by the PMC.

> 
> This is something relatively easy to fix though, let's hope it doesn't delay
> us too much.

I don't see a delay happening. Let's be patient for the next few days.

Best Regards,
Dave

> 
> Pedro.

Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Andrea Pescetti]

On 13/10/2012 Rob Weir wrote:

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:

Rob Weir wrote:

1) Sending a [VOTE][RESULTS] post to the IPMC list
2) Sending the proposed resolution to the board list


The 72 hours just expired and I've taken care of both steps. So 
everything to be done on our (PPMC) side is done. It's up to the Board 
now to accept our resolution in their agenda and to vote on it at their 
next meeting.



So  I do not know whether it is accurate to say that no one but Dave
is "active in more than just the OO project".


The observation was then clarified to the idea that we could keep more 
mentors on board. Anyway, no discussion sparked from it, so it's not 
delaying our graduation and it wasn't raised as a formal obstacle to 
graduation.


Regards,
  Andrea.

Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Rob Weir]

On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Pedro Giffuni  wrote:
>
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: Rob Weir 
> ...
>>>
>>>  As a minor update, the only observation we received so far (besides a
>>>  substantial number of +1 votes, no abstentions or -1) was that almost all
>>>  the proposed PMC members do not belong to other Apache projects; our
>> mentors
>>>  were asked if they perceived this as a problem, and we didn't get an
>> answer
>>>  from them so far.
>>>
>>
>> Hmmm I think there are several PMC members who are involved with
>> other areas of Apache:
>>
>> 1) Don is involved with ConCom, as well as working with Sally on Press
>> and Communications.
>>
>> 2) Others, like Oliver, Louis, etc., have been active in the ApacheCon 
>> planning.
>>
>> 3) Andrew,  Juergen and Raphael have worked closely with Infra on many
>> things.  There may be others.
>>
>> 4) In general I think we're comfortable working with Trademarks and
>> Legal Affairs on an ongoing basis.  This includes raising questions
>> and getting advice, but some, like Dennis, are active sharing what
>> they have learned as well.
>>
>> 5) Dave is involved with POI.  Don and Juergen are also on the PMC of
>> the ODF Toolkit.  I think Pedro said he was getting involved with a
>> new BeanShell project proposal.
>>
>> 6) There was the work moving the SPI funds to Apache that involved
>> coordinating with ASF Treasurer.
>>
>> So  I do not know whether it is accurate to say that no one but Dave
>> is "active in more than just the OO project".
>>
>
> The above is all mostly unrelated. I do think we should have included
> some of our mentors in the PMC.
>
> This was a failure in the method we chose to determine the initial PMC:
> we chose based on project visibility/popularity and by their function our
> mentors have tried to remain with a low profile and intervene only when
> it was absolutely necessary.
>

Once we graduate this role will be played by the ASF Board.  They keep
a low profile and intervene in projects only when absolutely
necessary.

> This is something relatively easy to fix though, let's hope it doesn't delay
> us too much.
>
> Pedro.

Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Dave Fisher]

On Oct 13, 2012, at 1:06 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Pedro Giffuni  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> - Original Message -
>>> From: Rob Weir 
>> ...
 
 As a minor update, the only observation we received so far (besides a
 substantial number of +1 votes, no abstentions or -1) was that almost all
 the proposed PMC members do not belong to other Apache projects; our
>>> mentors
 were asked if they perceived this as a problem, and we didn't get an
>>> answer
 from them so far.
 
>>> 
>>> Hmmm I think there are several PMC members who are involved with
>>> other areas of Apache:
>>> 
>>> 1) Don is involved with ConCom, as well as working with Sally on Press
>>> and Communications.
>>> 
>>> 2) Others, like Oliver, Louis, etc., have been active in the ApacheCon 
>>> planning.
>>> 
>>> 3) Andrew,  Juergen and Raphael have worked closely with Infra on many
>>> things.  There may be others.
>>> 
>>> 4) In general I think we're comfortable working with Trademarks and
>>> Legal Affairs on an ongoing basis.  This includes raising questions
>>> and getting advice, but some, like Dennis, are active sharing what
>>> they have learned as well.
>>> 
>>> 5) Dave is involved with POI.  Don and Juergen are also on the PMC of
>>> the ODF Toolkit.  I think Pedro said he was getting involved with a
>>> new BeanShell project proposal.
>>> 
>>> 6) There was the work moving the SPI funds to Apache that involved
>>> coordinating with ASF Treasurer.
>>> 
>>> So  I do not know whether it is accurate to say that no one but Dave
>>> is "active in more than just the OO project".
>>> 
>> 
>> The above is all mostly unrelated. I do think we should have included
>> some of our mentors in the PMC.
>> 
>> This was a failure in the method we chose to determine the initial PMC:
>> we chose based on project visibility/popularity and by their function our
>> mentors have tried to remain with a low profile and intervene only when
>> it was absolutely necessary.
>> 
> 
> Once we graduate this role will be played by the ASF Board.  They keep
> a low profile and intervene in projects only when absolutely
> necessary.

One continual intervention is that board will ACK (or NAK) each PMC membership 
change.

They will need to approve at the next board meeting any change in the PMC Chair 
- the PMC Chair is an Officer of The ASF.

The Board will expect Monthly reports for the first three months and quarterly 
reports subsequently.

Any Apache Member may always review and participate on any private mailing list.

Regards,
Dave

> 
>> This is something relatively easy to fix though, let's hope it doesn't delay
>> us too much.
>> 
>> Pedro.

Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Kay Schenk]

On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Pedro Giffuni  wrote:

>
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: Rob Weir 
> ...
> >>
> >>  As a minor update, the only observation we received so far (besides a
> >>  substantial number of +1 votes, no abstentions or -1) was that almost
> all
> >>  the proposed PMC members do not belong to other Apache projects; our
> > mentors
> >>  were asked if they perceived this as a problem, and we didn't get an
> > answer
> >>  from them so far.
> >>
> >
> > Hmmm I think there are several PMC members who are involved with
> > other areas of Apache:
> >
> > 1) Don is involved with ConCom, as well as working with Sally on Press
> > and Communications.
> >
> > 2) Others, like Oliver, Louis, etc., have been active in the ApacheCon
> planning.
> >
> > 3) Andrew,  Juergen and Raphael have worked closely with Infra on many
> > things.  There may be others.
> >
> > 4) In general I think we're comfortable working with Trademarks and
> > Legal Affairs on an ongoing basis.  This includes raising questions
> > and getting advice, but some, like Dennis, are active sharing what
> > they have learned as well.
> >
> > 5) Dave is involved with POI.  Don and Juergen are also on the PMC of
> > the ODF Toolkit.  I think Pedro said he was getting involved with a
> > new BeanShell project proposal.
> >
> > 6) There was the work moving the SPI funds to Apache that involved
> > coordinating with ASF Treasurer.
> >
> > So  I do not know whether it is accurate to say that no one but Dave
> > is "active in more than just the OO project".
> >
>
> The above is all mostly unrelated. I do think we should have included
> some of our mentors in the PMC.
>

It never occurred to me that any of them would have necessarily been
interested. It seemed curious to me that this should be pointed out
actually, but I have no former experience in how initial PMCs are
established.   Maybe it was mostly a concern due to our size and the extent
of our activities. We have the "roles" thread that Oliver started a while
back that should be documented on the planning wiki, and see if we've
forgotten anything, or want to document these activities more in depth.

As for me, I'm happy to see that Dave Fisher is included, and I'm sure we
can rely on him for advice, etc.


> This was a failure in the method we chose to determine the initial PMC:
> we chose based on project visibility/popularity and by their function our
> mentors have tried to remain with a low profile and intervene only when
> it was absolutely necessary.
>
> This is something relatively easy to fix though, let's hope it doesn't
> delay
> us too much.
>
> Pedro.
>



-- 

MzK

"Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never
 dealt  with a cat."
-- Robert Heinlein

Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Ross Gardler]

Sent from my tablet
On Oct 12, 2012 6:29 PM, "Andrea Pescetti"  wrote:
>

...

>
> As a minor update, the only observation we received so far (besides a
substantial number of +1 votes, no abstentions or -1) was that almost all
the proposed PMC members do not belong to other Apache projects; our
mentors were asked if they perceived this as a problem, and we didn't get
an answer from them so far.
>

Actually the observation was that there's only one Member. The motivation
behind this concern is twofold (note this is my interpretation, not
necessarily the view of the person asking the question):

This is a large and complex project that is requiring the ASF to adapt in
many areas and resist other changes. Therefore the Membership needs to be
in agreement about foundational issues. The lack of members on the PMC
means might be limited early visibility into upcoming foundational issues.

Secondly, this is a large and complex project that would benefit a great
deal from the ongoing support of ASF Members from a community perspective.
I, and other mentors voted +1 on the recommendation so clearly we believe
that the PPMC is in good shape. But it doesn't yet have deep roots in the
Apache Way. This is not about the health of the PPMC it is about the need
for guidance (for example, I like to think I'm pretty much in control of my
own affairs but I still bounce things to my life coach occasionally).
However, graduating doesn't remove access to mentoring, it just changes the
role of those mentors.

These things need to be remembered by the community as a whole. In
particular members need to ensure that they actively engage with the ASF
and use the support and guidance available to ensure AOO continues to
develop healthily. Personaly, I see a problem that needs to be managed but
not one that should slow graduation.

Hopefully this will be the last time I speak with an official mentor hat on
;)

Ross

> Regards,
>   Andrea.

Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Ross Gardler]

Sent from my tablet
On Oct 13, 2012 11:00 PM, "Kay Schenk"  wrote:
>

?..

>
> It never occurred to me that any of them would have necessarily been
> interested.

The fact that it never occurred to anyone participating in the definition
of the PMC membership is, in my opinion, a major failing of process which
was designed to identify people with sufficient merit. I would have thought
all of your active mentors have earned sufficient merit and should have
been invited to join. Furthermore, at least on mentor indicated a desire to
serve on the PMC, so there was no need for it to "occur" to anyone, it was
explicit.

This is the first time I've seen a PPMC fail nominate its active mentors as
PMC members. There is a lesson in there for the community but it is no
longer my place to convey what I think that lesson is (since my last mail
was my last as a mentor)

Ross

Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Rob Weir]

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Ross Gardler
 wrote:
> Sent from my tablet
> On Oct 13, 2012 11:00 PM, "Kay Schenk"  wrote:
>>
>
> ?..
>
>>
>> It never occurred to me that any of them would have necessarily been
>> interested.
>
> The fact that it never occurred to anyone participating in the definition
> of the PMC membership is, in my opinion, a major failing of process which
> was designed to identify people with sufficient merit. I would have thought


Actually, I explicitly mentioned this, and more than once, in the
earlier phase of this process.

-Rob

> all of your active mentors have earned sufficient merit and should have
> been invited to join. Furthermore, at least on mentor indicated a desire to
> serve on the PMC, so there was no need for it to "occur" to anyone, it was
> explicit.
>
> This is the first time I've seen a PPMC fail nominate its active mentors as
> PMC members. There is a lesson in there for the community but it is no
> longer my place to convey what I think that lesson is (since my last mail
> was my last as a mentor)
>
> Ross

Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Ariel Constenla-Haile]

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 04:50:06PM +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
> The fact that it never occurred to anyone participating in the definition
> of the PMC membership is, in my opinion, a major failing of process which
> was designed to identify people with sufficient merit.

Now that you mentioned it, the process was more democratic, than
meritocratic: it didn't only fail to identify people with sufficient
merit, it also failed to measure merit (that's why I voted 0).


Regards
-- 
Ariel Constenla-Haile
La Plata, Argentina


pgpkxlhHtoeLA.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Rob Weir]

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile
 wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 04:50:06PM +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
>> The fact that it never occurred to anyone participating in the definition
>> of the PMC membership is, in my opinion, a major failing of process which
>> was designed to identify people with sufficient merit.
>
> Now that you mentioned it, the process was more democratic, than
> meritocratic: it didn't only fail to identify people with sufficient
> merit, it also failed to measure merit (that's why I voted 0).
>

Isn't this easy to solve?  All we need is for one proposed PMC-member
to say that they will, as one of their first actions as a TLP PMC
member, propose the former mentors for PMC membership.

Is anyone willing to state this?

-Rob


>
> Regards
> --
> Ariel Constenla-Haile
> La Plata, Argentina

Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Dave Fisher]

On Oct 14, 2012, at 9:30 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile
>  wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 04:50:06PM +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>> The fact that it never occurred to anyone participating in the definition
>>> of the PMC membership is, in my opinion, a major failing of process which
>>> was designed to identify people with sufficient merit.
>> 
>> Now that you mentioned it, the process was more democratic, than
>> meritocratic: it didn't only fail to identify people with sufficient
>> merit, it also failed to measure merit (that's why I voted 0).
>> 
> 
> Isn't this easy to solve?  All we need is for one proposed PMC-member
> to say that they will, as one of their first actions as a TLP PMC
> member, propose the former mentors for PMC membership.
> 
> Is anyone willing to state this?

Yes. That has been my plan. I also would accept any additions to the PMC that 
the Board chooses to make.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> -Rob
> 
> 
>> 
>> Regards
>> --
>> Ariel Constenla-Haile
>> La Plata, Argentina

Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Ross Gardler]

Yes, it's easily resolved, Dave already indicated the three ways it might
be resolved. Like I said its more of a lesson to be learned than a reason
to delay. Awareness of the issue is enough for now.

Ross

Sent from mobile, forgive terseness and errors
On Oct 14, 2012 5:55 PM, "Dave Fisher"  wrote:

>
> On Oct 14, 2012, at 9:30 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile
> >  wrote:
> >> On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 04:50:06PM +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
> >>> The fact that it never occurred to anyone participating in the
> definition
> >>> of the PMC membership is, in my opinion, a major failing of process
> which
> >>> was designed to identify people with sufficient merit.
> >>
> >> Now that you mentioned it, the process was more democratic, than
> >> meritocratic: it didn't only fail to identify people with sufficient
> >> merit, it also failed to measure merit (that's why I voted 0).
> >>
> >
> > Isn't this easy to solve?  All we need is for one proposed PMC-member
> > to say that they will, as one of their first actions as a TLP PMC
> > member, propose the former mentors for PMC membership.
> >
> > Is anyone willing to state this?
>
> Yes. That has been my plan. I also would accept any additions to the PMC
> that the Board chooses to make.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> --
> >> Ariel Constenla-Haile
> >> La Plata, Argentina
>
>

Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Rob Weir]

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>
> On Oct 14, 2012, at 9:30 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile
>>  wrote:
>>> On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 04:50:06PM +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
 The fact that it never occurred to anyone participating in the definition
 of the PMC membership is, in my opinion, a major failing of process which
 was designed to identify people with sufficient merit.
>>>
>>> Now that you mentioned it, the process was more democratic, than
>>> meritocratic: it didn't only fail to identify people with sufficient
>>> merit, it also failed to measure merit (that's why I voted 0).
>>>
>>
>> Isn't this easy to solve?  All we need is for one proposed PMC-member
>> to say that they will, as one of their first actions as a TLP PMC
>> member, propose the former mentors for PMC membership.
>>
>> Is anyone willing to state this?
>
> Yes. That has been my plan. I also would accept any additions to the PMC that 
> the Board chooses to make.
>

Great.  Personally I think it makes sense for the PMC to manage its
own evolution.  This is a non-trivial part of The Apache Way.

I realize that the ASF Board has the ability in extraordinary
situations to intervene directly in a PMC's decision making process.
"As a last resort" and "a blunt instrument" are the terms I recall
being used earlier in reference to Board intervention.   It will be
very interesting to see if they think this is a situation that
warrants such action.

-Rob

> Regards,
> Dave
>
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> --
>>> Ariel Constenla-Haile
>>> La Plata, Argentina
>

Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Ross Gardler]

Sent from my tablet
On Oct 14, 2012 9:18 PM, "Rob Weir"  wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Dave Fisher 
wrote:
> >
> > On Oct 14, 2012, at 9:30 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile
> >>  wrote:
> >>> On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 04:50:06PM +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
>  The fact that it never occurred to anyone participating in the
definition
>  of the PMC membership is, in my opinion, a major failing of process
which
>  was designed to identify people with sufficient merit.
> >>>
> >>> Now that you mentioned it, the process was more democratic, than
> >>> meritocratic: it didn't only fail to identify people with sufficient
> >>> merit, it also failed to measure merit (that's why I voted 0).
> >>>
> >>
> >> Isn't this easy to solve?  All we need is for one proposed PMC-member
> >> to say that they will, as one of their first actions as a TLP PMC
> >> member, propose the former mentors for PMC membership.
> >>
> >> Is anyone willing to state this?
> >
> > Yes. That has been my plan. I also would accept any additions to the
PMC that the Board chooses to make.
> >
>
> Great.  Personally I think it makes sense for the PMC to manage its
> own evolution.  This is a non-trivial part of The Apache Way.
>
> I realize that the ASF Board has the ability in extraordinary
> situations to intervene directly in a PMC's decision making process.
> "As a last resort" and "a blunt instrument" are the terms I recall
> being used earlier in reference to Board intervention.   It will be
> very interesting to see if they think this is a situation that
> warrants such action.

Please don't quote things out of context, it doesn't help. Changing a
resolution is not an "extraordinary situation", its part of the board's
responsibility to the foundation. The PMC I currently chair, for example,
had a couple of relevant and appropriate people added by the board before
creation.

That being said, I am not suggesting the board will take such an action, I
cannot predict the actions of a board of 9. I will observe, that a concern
has been raised and the reactions of this community to those concerns has
been, on the whole, appreciative and appropriate (and I don't mean only
Dave's statement above, in fact I dont think that is necessary).

Ross

>
> -Rob
>
> > Regards,
> > Dave
> >
> >>
> >> -Rob
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>> --
> >>> Ariel Constenla-Haile
> >>> La Plata, Argentina
> >

Re: Graduation timeline: A reminder for project members, press and list observers

[Donald Harbison]

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>
> On Oct 14, 2012, at 9:30 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile
>>  wrote:
>>> On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 04:50:06PM +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
 The fact that it never occurred to anyone participating in the definition
 of the PMC membership is, in my opinion, a major failing of process which
 was designed to identify people with sufficient merit.
>>>
>>> Now that you mentioned it, the process was more democratic, than
>>> meritocratic: it didn't only fail to identify people with sufficient
>>> merit, it also failed to measure merit (that's why I voted 0).
>>>
>>
>> Isn't this easy to solve?  All we need is for one proposed PMC-member
>> to say that they will, as one of their first actions as a TLP PMC
>> member, propose the former mentors for PMC membership.
>>
>> Is anyone willing to state this?
>
> Yes. That has been my plan. I also would accept any additions to the PMC that 
> the Board chooses to make.

+1 ...and I think we no longer need to string this thread out. (IMHO)

>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> --
>>> Ariel Constenla-Haile
>>> La Plata, Argentina
>