Re: [PROPOSAL] TL;DR editors

2013-04-09 Thread Greg Stein
It is not your job. You are one of many of the IPMC. You also happen to be the liaison to the Board. On Apr 9, 2013 9:39 AM, "Benson Margulies" wrote: > I assume that you will take that role for this thread. > > Some people might claim that this is my job in general. However, my level > of enthu

Re: [PROPOSAL] TL;DR editors

2013-04-09 Thread Ross Gardler
I think this should be adopted as best practice by all of us in all mailing lists - no I don't do it any more than the next person :-( Benson, it's not your job to do it - whatever others might say. Of course, the odd reminder from you (and others) might help. Ross On 9 April 2013 14:39, Benson

Re: [PROPOSAL] TL;DR editors

2013-04-09 Thread Upayavira
This is an interesting idea. It does, however, assume that the person who starts a thread is able to be sufficiently neutral to represent the whole story, rather than their own particular take on it. Such summarisation is something of an art. Upayavira On Tue, Apr 9, 2013, at 02:15 PM, Alan Cabre

Re: Bulldozing (was TL;DR editors)

2013-04-09 Thread Bertrand Delacretaz
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 4:37 PM, Alan Cabrera wrote: > ...What I am more worried about is where some new procedure or policy is > enacted and there's no official notice... We could use an [IMPORTANT] tag in the subject lines for such things - but all policy changes require a [VOTE] anyway. -Bert

Re: Bulldozing (was TL;DR editors)

2013-04-09 Thread Alan Cabrera
On Apr 9, 2013, at 7:31 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: > IMO, it's time to enshrine this advice from Doug on the "email tips" page at > : > >http://markmail.org/message/viluvkt6x2dhj4iv Ahh, if only that advice that was given over a year ago w

Re: Bulldozing (was TL;DR editors)

2013-04-09 Thread Bertrand Delacretaz
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: > ...Or to create a "bulldozer detector" tool... My bulldozer detector is that I stop reading. I'm probably not alone ;-) -Bertrand - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubs

Bulldozing (was TL;DR editors)

2013-04-09 Thread Marvin Humphrey
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 6:15 AM, Alan Cabrera wrote: > The amount of email on this list has grown beyond ridiculousness. > Thoughts? We'd be fine if it weren't for a small number of participants "bulldozing" -- dominating a discussion by sheer volume of email. IMO, it's time to enshrine this adv

Re: [PROPOSAL] TL;DR editors

2013-04-09 Thread Bertrand Delacretaz
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Alan Cabrera wrote: > ...The amount of email on this list has grown beyond ridiculousness. I > propose a new required process on this list whereby anyone who starts a new > thread is required to diligently > monitor it and post a summary at the end... Good idea,

Re: [PROPOSAL] TL;DR editors

2013-04-09 Thread Rich Bowen
On Apr 9, 2013, at 9:15 AM, Alan Cabrera wrote: > Thoughts? Oh, yes, please. If it even happened half the time it would be absolutely wonderful. And I nominate Shane to be the default editor, because he's so very good at summarizing threads. ;-) -- Rich Bowen rbo...@rcbowen.com :: @rbowen

Re: [PROPOSAL] TL;DR editors

2013-04-09 Thread Benson Margulies
I assume that you will take that role for this thread. Some people might claim that this is my job in general. However, my level of enthusiasm for trying to sweep up after the elephant depends on the elephant. I think that the harder case is the one in which there is, apparently, no consensus. Wh

[PROPOSAL] TL;DR editors

2013-04-09 Thread Alan Cabrera
The amount of email on this list has grown beyond ridiculousness. I propose a new required process on this list whereby anyone who starts a new thread is required to diligently monitor it and post a summary at the end. The person would assume an editor role for that thread. [SUMMARY] Incubator

Re: TL;DR

2012-02-04 Thread Greg Reddin
Sent from my mobile device. On Feb 4, 2012, at 12:45 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: > If I am correct Apache Flex has 2. Fwiw we have 3: you, Bertrand, and myself. Greg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apach

Re: TL;DR

2012-02-04 Thread Dave Fisher
On Feb 4, 2012, at 12:15 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 2/4/2012 12:45 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: >> >> If it is different from Chris's then I think Bill should write his proposal. > > Dave, mine is not difference in process, substance or requirements. Do you advocate the 3 Apache Members per

Re: TL;DR

2012-02-04 Thread William A. Rowe Jr.
On 2/4/2012 3:05 AM, ant elder wrote: > > I also agree with a comment from Sam on another thread about wouldn't > it be possible to get to just a single chair candidate. That doesn't > seem to be happening yet so as there are all these plans going on to > get rid of the Incubator altogether can't

Re: TL;DR

2012-02-04 Thread William A. Rowe Jr.
On 2/4/2012 12:45 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: > > If it is different from Chris's then I think Bill should write his proposal. Dave, mine is not difference in process, substance or requirements. Chris and 7 board members are now familiar with the delta, which is really not up for incubator to choose.

Re: TL;DR

2012-02-04 Thread Dave Fisher
On Feb 4, 2012, at 10:04 AM, Benson Margulies wrote: > On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: >> >> On Feb 3, 2012, at 10:11 PM, Scott Wilson wrote: >> >>> On 3 Feb 2012, at 23:17, Benson Margulies wrote: >>> A number of people are asking for the incubator PMC to take a deep

Re: TL;DR

2012-02-04 Thread Benson Margulies
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: > > On Feb 3, 2012, at 10:11 PM, Scott Wilson wrote: > >> On 3 Feb 2012, at 23:17, Benson Margulies wrote: >> >>> A number of people are asking for the incubator PMC to take a deep >>> breath and allow room to digest and contemplate the various i

Re: TL;DR

2012-02-04 Thread Dave Fisher
On Feb 3, 2012, at 10:11 PM, Scott Wilson wrote: > On 3 Feb 2012, at 23:17, Benson Margulies wrote: > >> A number of people are asking for the incubator PMC to take a deep >> breath and allow room to digest and contemplate the various issues >> that have led to a bumper crop of email. These are

Re: TL;DR

2012-02-04 Thread Franklin, Matthew B.
On 2/4/12 1:11 AM, "Scott Wilson" wrote: >On 3 Feb 2012, at 23:17, Benson Margulies wrote: > >> A number of people are asking for the incubator PMC to take a deep >> breath and allow room to digest and contemplate the various issues >> that have led to a bumper crop of email. These are complex

Re: TL;DR

2012-02-04 Thread ant elder
could avoid intemperate exchanges, there is still going > to be a lot to read and think about. > > One way to make the load lighter is to try to make one decision at a > time. Entirely selfishly, I suggest looking at the chair election > first. > Agree with the TL;DR, much to man

Re: TL;DR

2012-02-03 Thread Christian Grobmeier
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 12:17 AM, Benson Margulies wrote: > One way to make the load lighter is to try to make one decision at a > time. Entirely selfishly, I suggest looking at the chair election > first. +1 Too many loose ends - we need to get something done now. I have proposed it already, the

Re: TL;DR

2012-02-03 Thread Scott Wilson
On 3 Feb 2012, at 23:17, Benson Margulies wrote: > A number of people are asking for the incubator PMC to take a deep > breath and allow room to digest and contemplate the various issues > that have led to a bumper crop of email. These are complex questions, > and even if we could avoid intemperat

Re: TL;DR

2012-02-03 Thread William A. Rowe Jr.
On 2/3/2012 9:16 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: > On 4 February 2012 01:56, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > >> Pass all responsibility for mentoring to the incubating projects and >> the members, and responsibility for ensuring they are mentored to the >> board. > > The projects then turn to where? That

Re: TL;DR

2012-02-03 Thread Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
On Feb 3, 2012, at 7:16 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: > On 4 February 2012 01:56, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: >> On 2/3/2012 7:38 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: >>> >>> All nominees have said they back the radical reform plan. That plan as >>> it currently stands reads, to me, as "nuke the IPMC and pass all >

Re: TL;DR

2012-02-03 Thread Ross Gardler
On 4 February 2012 01:56, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 2/3/2012 7:38 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: >> >> All nominees have said they back the radical reform plan. That plan as >> it currently stands reads, to me, as "nuke the IPMC and pass all >> responsibility for ensuring projects are adequately me

Re: TL;DR

2012-02-03 Thread Benson Margulies
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 8:38 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: > On 3 February 2012 23:17, Benson Margulies wrote: >> One way to make the load lighter is to try to make one decision at a >> time. > > +1 > >> Entirely selfishly, I suggest looking at the chair election >> first. > > All nominees have said the

Re: TL;DR

2012-02-03 Thread William A. Rowe Jr.
On 2/3/2012 7:38 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: > > All nominees have said they back the radical reform plan. That plan as > it currently stands reads, to me, as "nuke the IPMC and pass all > responsibility for ensuring projects are adequately mentored to > ComDev." Ross, I'm not a candidate. But I ce

Re: TL;DR

2012-02-03 Thread Ross Gardler
On 3 February 2012 23:17, Benson Margulies wrote: > One way to make the load lighter is to try to make one decision at a > time. +1 > Entirely selfishly, I suggest looking at the chair election > first. All nominees have said they back the radical reform plan. That plan as it currently stands r