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
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
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
Ted Leung wrote:
It seems like the discussion on Heraldry has died down, so I'd like to
call for a VOTE on accepting Heraldry into the incubator.
In keeping with Apache practice, I'd like to allow 72 hours or so for
the vote to close, so please vote by 11:59PST on Thursday July 13th.
The
+1
(non-bindig)
-Matthias
On 7/14/06, Paul Querna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ted Leung wrote:
It seems like the discussion on Heraldry has died down, so I'd like to
call for a VOTE on accepting Heraldry into the incubator.
In keeping with Apache practice, I'd like to allow 72 hours or so for
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
?
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
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
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
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]
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.
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
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
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
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?
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
On 7/11/06, Danese Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not that I get a vote...
not so: everyone gets a vote :-)
anyone who has a opinion on any issue should definitely feel free to express
it
however, only some votes are binding on apache (in this case, AIUI votes
from those currently on the
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 (
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 (
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
+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
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
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
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
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
On 7/10/06, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/10/06, Ted Leung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
In keeping with Apache practice, I'd like to allow 72 hours or so for
the vote to close, so please vote by 11:59PST on Thursday July 13th.
(this duration seems just a little
On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 12:50 +0100, robert burrell donkin wrote:
is 72 hours the right length for an acceptance vote?
I'd prefer a bit more time .. like the time for graduation etc. - these
are BIG decisions and unlike code decisions hard to revert. As such I
think we should not rush things.
+1
(And I'll note now that I'm interested in participating, although can't
commit the time to be a mentor right now.)
Ted Leung wrote:
It seems like the discussion on Heraldry has died down, so I'd like to
call for a VOTE on accepting Heraldry into the incubator.
In keeping with Apache
+1
(and what he said applies to me too)
Leo
On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 07:41:20AM -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
+1
(And I'll note now that I'm interested in participating, although can't
commit the time to be a mentor right now.)
Ted Leung wrote:
It seems like the discussion on
On 7/10/06, Ted Leung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems like the discussion on Heraldry has died down, so I'd like
to call for a VOTE on accepting Heraldry into the incubator.
In keeping with Apache practice, I'd like to allow 72 hours or so for
the vote to close, so please vote by 11:59PST on
It seems like the discussion on Heraldry has died down, so I'd like
to call for a VOTE on accepting Heraldry into the incubator.
In keeping with Apache practice, I'd like to allow 72 hours or so for
the vote to close, so please vote by 11:59PST on Thursday July 13th.
The current proposal
On 7/10/06, Ted Leung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
It seems like the discussion on Heraldry has died down, so I'd like
to call for a VOTE on accepting Heraldry into the incubator.
In keeping with Apache practice, I'd like to allow 72 hours or so for
robert burrell donkin wrote:
is 72 hours the right length for an acceptance vote?
I wouldn't do it over a week, especially a long weekend. And if very few
PMC members have voted, I might post a reminder to vote rather than close a
vote with a minimum of voters.
--- Noel
+1
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 12:50 +0100, robert burrell donkin wrote:
is 72 hours the right length for an acceptance vote?
I'd prefer a bit more time .. like the time for graduation etc. - these
are BIG decisions and unlike code decisions hard to revert. As such
On Jul 11, 2006, at 7:02 AM, Leo Simons wrote:
On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 12:50:44PM +0100, robert burrell donkin wrote:
On 7/10/06, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 7/10/06, Ted Leung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
In keeping with Apache practice, I'd like to allow 72 hours
On Jul 11, 2006, at 10:21 AM, Ted Leung wrote:
In this case, we had several weeks of discussion on Heraldry,
including some F2F
conversations at ApacheCon EU, so 72 hours doesn't seem like a big
deal to me.
If people want to extend the voting period, I've no problem with
that. I guess the
Ted Leung wrote:
In this case, we had several weeks of discussion on Heraldry,
including some F2F conversations at ApacheCon EU, so 72 hours
doesn't seem like a big deal to me.
Nor me.
I guess the bigger question is whether we ought to change the
72 hour guideline for the foundation as a
On Jul 11, 2006, at 10:57 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
I guess the bigger question is whether we ought to change the
72 hour guideline for the foundation as a whole, or make
incuabator votes a clearly noted exception.
We should use our judgment to ensure a collaborative environment
without
Ted Leung wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
We should use our judgment to ensure a collaborative environment
without undue overhead. But it would be unfair, for example, to
deliberately hold a vote when someone whom you know is opposed
is going to be off-line.
I was just asking the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
It seems like the discussion on Heraldry has died down, so I'd like
to call for a VOTE on accepting Heraldry into the incubator.
In keeping with Apache practice, I'd like to allow 72 hours or so for
the vote to close, so please vote by 11:59PST
+1 from me.
On 7/10/06, Ted Leung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
It seems like the discussion on Heraldry has died down, so I'd like
to call for a VOTE on accepting Heraldry into the incubator.
In keeping with Apache practice, I'd like to allow 72 hours
+1
On 7/10/06, Ted Leung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
It seems like the discussion on Heraldry has died down, so I'd like
to call for a VOTE on accepting Heraldry into the incubator.
In keeping with Apache practice, I'd like to allow 72 hours or so
On Tuesday 11 July 2006 05:05, Ted Leung wrote:
The current proposal is here: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/
HeraldryIdentityProposal, and I've included the full text below.
+1, non-binding.
Cheers
Niclas
-
To
On 7/10/06, Ted Leung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
It seems like the discussion on Heraldry has died down, so I'd like
to call for a VOTE on accepting Heraldry into the incubator.
+1
Cliff
51 matches
Mail list logo
