Hi -
We could better spend our energy looking at podlings with Mentor problems and
deciding which of three possible states fits the podling.
- Failed - no community is trully involved and there is nothing an active
mentor could do. Let's just admit it and retire the podling.
- Needs Help - a
On Wednesday, January 7, 2015, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote:
On Jan 7, 2015, at 10:46 AM, jan i j...@apache.org javascript:;
wrote:
On 7 January 2015 at 19:32, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com
javascript:; wrote:
On Jan 7, 2015, at 10:13 AM, Branko Čibej
+1
Pam
Pamela L. Dragosh
PMTS Research
One ATT Way
4D-170P
Bedminster, NJ 07921
908-901-2120 - Office
pdrag...@research.att.com
On 1/5/15, 2:04 PM, Hal Lockhart hal.lockh...@oracle.com wrote:
I added a comma and the word and to the Mentors section. The Mentors
are:
Emmanuel Lécharny,
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 11:01 AM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)
ross.gard...@microsoft.com wrote:
WTF? There have been presentations about the apache way at every ApacheCon
for about 15 years (twice in most years). I personally give 5-10 such
presentations a year (sometimes public sometimes
On 08/01/15 16:48, Chip Childers wrote:
On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 08:18:59PM -0800, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
Retiring the role of Champion sounds like an idea whose time has come. We
gave the Champion additional oversight responsibilities a while back -- but
how many times since then has having
+1
All we care about is that the podling has an active mentor who knows when to
ask for support and gets that support when they need it.
Ross
Microsoft Open Technologies, Inc.
A subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation
-Original Message-
From: Branko Čibej [mailto:br...@apache.org]
Sent:
+1
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 7:14 PM, DRAGOSH, PAMELA L (PAM)
pdrag...@research.att.com wrote:
+1
Pam
Pamela L. Dragosh
PMTS Research
One ATT Way
4D-170P
Bedminster, NJ 07921
908-901-2120 - Office
pdrag...@research.att.com
On 1/5/15, 2:04 PM, Hal Lockhart hal.lockh...@oracle.com
On Jan 8, 2015, at 10:06 AM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)
ross.gard...@microsoft.com wrote:
+1
All we care about is that the podling has an active mentor who knows when to
ask for support and gets that support when they need it.
Following that statement to a logical conclusion, all
pTLP adds a great deal of overhead to the board unless there is a review
process somewhere else. I've posted on this before so will not repeat here
beyond summarizing as moving responsibility for the problem does not fix the
problem.
I'm not seeing how this proposal fixes the problem either.
Chip is correct. The tools we use in board meetings make it easy for us to see
how many PMC members in a TLP resolution are members. If there are not enough
we will sometimes put the project on an informal watch list (as well as
ensuring appropriate people from the PMC go on the members watch
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org wrote:
An addition of the overseeing committee, will shield the board from
*some* of the day-to-day business of telling the pTLP that something
needs to be fixed.
Is this pretty close to IPMC in another name?
No it isn't.
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org wrote:
One extra thing to note, that while we can *start* this comittee as
dedicated
to Incubating projects, it will be a very natural extension to get it
involved
in monitoring all of TLPs, not just pTLPs.
What problem
An ASF release needs three binding +1 votes (I see you say two but in your
proposal but that would require a policy change in the ASF which I doubt will
happen). If there is only a single mentor approaches the IPMC to ask for those
votes. As a single active mentor on projects I have both asked
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)
ross.gard...@microsoft.com wrote:
Chip is correct. The tools we use in board meetings make it easy for us to
see how many PMC members in a TLP resolution are members. If there are not
enough we will sometimes put the project on an
On 08.01.2015 05:30, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 12:54 PM, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote:
Some podlings are graduating w/ no clear understanding of the Apache Way.
What is The Apache Way? No one can say.
There is no bounded set of expectations that an Apache
On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 08:18:59PM -0800, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
Retiring the role of Champion sounds like an idea whose time has come. We
gave the Champion additional oversight responsibilities a while back -- but
how many times since then has having that additional layer made a difference?
On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 05:20:40PM -0800, Henry Saputra wrote:
+1
I would recommend to remove that particular line about mentor staying
as mentor sake.
Either mentors join in as full fledge PMC (and as committer) or not at all.
+1, with the one comment that I've heard the board(s) review a
WTF? There have been presentations about the apache way at every ApacheCon for
about 15 years (twice in most years). I personally give 5-10 such presentations
a year (sometimes public sometimes not). I'm sure many others here do the same.
The Apache Way is really simple. There are very few
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 7:05 AM, Branko Čibej br...@apache.org wrote:
On 08.01.2015 15:32, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
The two mentor minimum is critical. I was going to make it three but
reasoned that if two were active, they could do the job.
Why? I've not yet seen a single argument that would
Yes, Benson. You should take it as a compliment that if the board invite you to
do remain and you agree then they trust you to be their eyes and ears, and if
necessary the person they turn to in order to investigate a potentially issue.
That's different from the mentor role in the IPMC though.
To be clear my email was not targeted at Marvin. We all know how hard Marvin
has worked to create the clear policy documents I talk about here. I hope
Marvin knows me well enough to recognize my debating style. This is not about
*him* it's about the impression of the top down rules you describe
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)
ross.gard...@microsoft.com wrote:
To be clear my email was not targeted at Marvin. We all know how hard
Marvin has worked to create the clear policy documents I talk about here. I
hope Marvin knows me well enough to recognize my
On 1/8/15, 10:49 AM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)
ross.gard...@microsoft.com wrote:
top down rules you describe below - as you seem to be implying that
should not exist in the Apache Way apart from a few immutable areas and I
agree.
But what are the few immutable areas? Why isn’t there a link
Members should look to the board to enforce policy, not define it (Though
Directors are members and will be involved with the definition)
This disagrees with much that the Foundation has published. In example:
The membership of the ASF elects the 9 member board to run the
foundation and to
Years ago I started creating a signpost site over on
http://community.apache.org which was intended provide a simplified gateway to
our copious documents that describe the Apache Way in all its glory. Since then
a few people have contributed to it. Our goal is to keep it simple, leave the
Julian Hyde created INCUBATOR-128:
-
Summary: Wrong email address in sample PPMC invitation email
Key: INCUBATOR-128
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-128
Project: Incubator
It's process vs. culture. We shouldn't get hung up on process.
Our bylaws (as a foundation) dictate that the board set the formal policies.
This is pretty much a requirement of the way we have to be structured to get
501c(3) status. Someone needs to be accountable. So, yes, the board votes on
Sorry I seem to have deleted a para from the below when editing for send. The
para was also on this site you will find
http://community.apache.org/speakers/slides.html which has decks from different
people with titles like):
•Open Innovation in The Apache Software Foundation
•Writing and
28 matches
Mail list logo
