justinmclean merged pull request #42: Clarify and simplify a little the roles
and responsibilities page
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/42
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond
justinmclean opened a new pull request #42: Clarify and simplify a little the
roles and responsibilities page
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/42
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service
the corrected version.
VOTE approved -
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/200607.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
Committed.
Move discursive material about PMC from policy to roles and responsibilities
material about PMC from policy to roles and responsibilities
Key: INCUBATOR-35
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-35
Project: Incubator
Issue Type
Move discursive material about PMC from policy to roles and responsibilities
Key: INCUBATOR-35
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-35
Project: Incubator
Roy,
Thanks. So let's clarify some of these issues (out of order from your
reply).
[The need for a Mentor to be an ASF Member was] imposed by
no other agency than the Incubator PMC, itself.
A need imposed by the board when it created the Incubator with a given
purpose that cannot be
Roy T. Fielding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That doesn't mean people need to be an ASF member to be involved in
incubation of a project
Goes without saying. :-) More on the rest in a bit.
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe,
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Membership is a half-way point? What's the full distance? ;-)
I'll let you know when I get there.
According to some, disagreeing with Roy is the obligatory Right of Passage.
;-)
But I agree with you: It is absolute nonsense to have someone
. the supporting
documentation should add descriptive and discursive content (unsuitable for
policy) and refer to the policy rather than repeat it. the policy document
should contain links to material in other documents that explain and discuss
the policy.
roles and responsibilities has a lot of overlap
On Jul 14, 2006, at 11:20 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
We just voted to elect a non-Member ASF Officer to the Incubator
PMC in order for him to act as Mentor for the projects sponsored
by the PMC of which he is the PMC Chair. Do we wish to declare
that election and process null and void? Or do
On 7/14/06, 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 7/14/06, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/14/06, 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
Cliff Schmidt wrote:
Could someone point to the post that would explain how it should be fixed?
To quote myself, but this is hardly the first time it has come up:
---
Mentors are (MUST BE) Incubator PMC Members. ASF Members are automatically
eligible for PMC membership; non-Members may be
On Jul 14, 2006, at 1:14 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
To quote myself, but this is hardly the first time it has come up:
---
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
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
It is absolute nonsense to have someone guiding newbies through
the ASF process when they haven't even made it to the halfway
point themselves.
Membership is a half-way point? What's the full distance? ;-)
But I agree with you: It is absolute nonsense to have someone
On Jul 14, 2006, at 1:57 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
It is absolute nonsense to have someone guiding newbies through
the ASF process when they haven't even made it to the halfway
point themselves.
Membership is a half-way point? What's the full distance? ;-)
I'll
On 7/14/06, Roy T. Fielding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That doesn't mean people need to be an ASF member to be involved in
incubation of a project -- they simply don't meet the required need
for a Mentor who is an ASF member.
+1. -- justin
On 7/14/06, Justin Erenkrantz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/14/06, Roy T. Fielding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That doesn't mean people need to be an ASF member to be involved in
incubation of a project -- they simply don't meet the required need
for a Mentor who is an ASF member.
+1. --
Cliff,
Just saw your updates. Many thanks indeed! Allowed me to be lazy :.
Have also added something around your comment, echoed by Nicola, around
the Shepherd not being an initial committer, but having CVS access for
administrative purposes.
Cheers,
Berin
Cliff Schmidt wrote:
On
Please ignore this post. I saw that Nicola Ken was starting to pull up
against my tail and didn't want that rat bastard to have contributed more
than me statistically to the discussion. Thus I have posted this mail to
keep Nicola Ken from beating me. I think Just in case lines of mails are
Please ignore this post. I saw that Nicola Ken was starting to pull up
against my tail and didn't want that rat bastard to have contributed more
than me statistically to the discussion. Thus I have posted this mail to
keep Nicola Ken from beating me. I think Just in case lines of mails are
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Everybody's a comedian, but not everybody is funny.
Zut - I thought it was funny!
Steve.
Andrew C. Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 26/09/2003 05:48:30 AM:
Please ignore this post. I saw that Nicola Ken was starting to pull up
against my tail and didn't want
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
From: Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It's about having an elder shepherd mentoring the main shepherd, and
possibly requiring at least two people helping in Incubation.
As someone who has seen multiple incubations, you feel that there is an
expertise related to
On Tuesday, September 23, 2003 5:29 AM, Berin Lautenbach wrote:
Would be great if you could have a read through the new version of
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?IncubatorMussings
I also think this is a very well-written and extremely useful document.
Below are a few
Cliff,
Firstly - thanks for all the thoughts. Great stuff! (I think. Grumble
grumble, more work, mutter mutter :)
You are more than welcome to update anything in the document you so
desire. However that's not a hint - am happy to (and will tomorrow)
take all this on board and make the
On Wednesday, September 24, 2003 5:23 AM, Berin Lautenbach wrote:
Cliff,
Firstly - thanks for all the thoughts. Great stuff! (I think.
Grumble grumble, more work, mutter mutter :)
You are more than welcome to update anything in the document you so
desire. However that's not a hint -
From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sometimes a sponsor or a shepherd has to act fast and remove from CVS
things that are not correct, like licensing. Or simply to give a hand,
always about incubation things.
I don't find it inconsistent with meritrocracy, as they should be
I hope that the policies, procedures, responsibilities, and
ultimate accountabilities, will have a tangible and net-
positive impact on the overall development of the Apache Community.
:-)
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe,
Ted Leung wrote:
On 9/22/2003 4:50 PM, Berin Lautenbach wrote:
From: Rodent of Unusual Size
what's the role of the incubator pmc in this? at the least, it's a set
of passionate asf people who are essentially in agreement about what
makes something a genuine 'apache'-style project, who review
From: Stephen McConnell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I think that Berin and I are aiming at the same objective and have very
similar motives. I happen to think that we can leverage and utilize the
contribution of Berin's process by analysing his concers and underlying
interests and drawing from
Stephen McConnell wrote:
Thus you have the shepherd appointed by the sponsor PMC, but being
bound by the Incubator PMC
rules and regs. (And I would imagine the incubator
would need to agree the choice.)
Which does not work in practice (with respect to current policy).
The Icubator PMC has been
Peoples,
Have done another update and tried to represent the results of the
various comments during the day. Have mainly tried to :
1) Re-emphaise the role of a Sponsor as an ongoing role. No particular
requirements in the process (other than initial recommendation), but
have stated that
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
An incubation needs someone that actively nutrures the community, pushes
the agenda and reports to the PMC of which he is part.
I call him the sponsor.
We also need someone that is knowlegable of how the Incubator works and
that reports to the Incubator PMC.
I call
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
It's about having an elder shepherd mentoring the main shepherd, and
possibly requiring at least two people helping in Incubation.
What do others think about this?
Over-regulation.
/Steven
--
Steven Noelshttp://outerthought.org/
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
Would be great if you could have a read through the new version of
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?IncubatorMussings
Its looking good.
One point concerning the description of the Sponsoring Entity. I
currently includes a sub-heading Responsibilities
From: Stephen McConnell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
One point concerning the description of the Sponsoring Entity. I
currently includes a sub-heading Responsibilities of the Sponsoring
Entity. The content is basically describing responsibilities of the
Shepherd. It would read better if this
On Monday, Sep 22, 2003, at 04:37 Europe/Rome, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Berin,
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?IncubatorMussings
Had a read. Great stuff :.
At a quick glance, I see some things to change.
- there has not been stated a minimum community size to start
- it has been
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
...
I have also very much de-emphasised the role of the sponsor. From what
I've seen, the key role post acceptance is the Shepherd. If the Sponsor
wishes to become the shepherd, then they retain the responsibilities,
otherwise they can move onto other things, having
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
1) how do people get on the incubation PMC? any committer? only
members? members and officials? everybody committer that previously has
a record of helping incubation? just curious of what feelings are.
another good question. i agree with roy that anyone with an
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
...
Noel, if you don't mind I'll also answer this.
I agree with the principle (otherwise we get back to complete PMC
incubation independence and things blow up) but there are a few things
worth asking:
1) how do people get on the incubation PMC? any committer? only
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 08:39:20 -0400
(Subject: Re: roles and responsibilities)
Rodent of Unusual Size [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2) isn't the incubation more an oversight group, a task force, then a
project?
you seem to be harking back to 'projects produce code'. i disagree
Berin:
Have just gone thought the changes. I like the notion of the
Sponsoring Entity at this addresses the entity into which a prodling
is destined. Perhaps we could change the name to Parent. I.e. if a
cadidate aims to be top-level, its parent would be the Board. If the
project aims to
I like the notion of the Sponsoring Entity at this addresses
the entity into which a prodling is destined.
Apparently, the part that destination is an exit criteria hasn't resonated
with you. Yes, it is helpful to have an idea up front, but not in the sense
where you took it, specifically:
On 9/21/2003 10:59 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Ted Leung wrote:
Minimum size is not enough here. There also needs to be a diversity
requirement. For example XMLBeans must have no more than 50% of its
committers from a single organization.
Good exit criteria.
You're right, of course
On 9/22/2003 5:39 AM, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
1) how do people get on the incubation PMC? any committer? only
members? members and officials? everybody committer that previously has
a record of helping incubation? just curious of what feelings are.
On 9/22/2003 1:27 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
+1. I don't think that we need have multiple people fufill all these
roles. If the sponsor/shepherd/mentor is going to be a member of the
incubator PMC (see 1 above), then they ought to be trusted to follow the
incubator guidlines (once they
Steve,
From: Stephen McConnell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
1. Entities (Board, Parent, Incubator PMC) should not assigned actional
responsibilities - only decision responsibility. Actional reposibility
should be assigned to roles that are represented by accountable
individuals. There
Ted,
If I were you, I think that I would subscribe myself to the Incubator PMC
mailing list. That way you can see how things are settling in (I would
expect that they could use a bit of time to consolidate all of the
discussion), and if they say that they're ready, find out whom is going to
take
Berin:
Have just read though your email and I feel that I have very strong
empathy with the position your raising - but all the same I'm going to
disagree with you! I'm confident that if we were in a cafe down in the
14e we would tie this up nicely in less that a couple of hours. But
that
Stephen McConnell wrote:
Small change in wording. If Ted stops doing his role as Shepherd,
then I would see it as the responsibility of the XML Project PMC
Chair to step in and find someone else.
Wooop - a compound correction to an otherwise perfect composition:
If Ted stops doing his
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
Steve,
Not actually sure we are disagreeing. Let me
just add some thoughts and see where we get to...
Zut ... Australia really is at the end of the earth relative to France!
(Zut translated into Australian is B* H***).
GRIN. Tell me about it. The time
if this relates to an actionable issue - could you be a touch more
specific as to the action.
Actually, at this point I think that discussion has converged, a consensus
appears to have emerged, and since Berin has taken a lead on coalescing this
material, I think it makes sense to give him (and
Once I got past some of your phrasing, which I consider somewhat
injudiciously selected considering your likely audience,
Hang on a tick - I have to look this one up!
LOL
Well, for a start, referring to every decision making body as dysfunctional
wasn't the wisest course of action in my view.
Think of this entire process as the establishment of a set of imutable
procedures that will protect us from the breakdown of their system.
Things don't work that way, Stephen. People don't. Especially the kind of
people who participate here. This is not a community of bureaucrats. As
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Think of this entire process as the establishment of a set of imutable
procedures that will protect us from the breakdown of their system.
Things don't work that way, Stephen. People don't. Especially the kind of
people who participate here. This is not a community
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Once I got past some of your phrasing, which I consider somewhat
injudiciously selected considering your likely audience,
Hang on a tick - I have to look this one up!
LOL
Well, for a start, referring to every decision making body as dysfunctional
wasn't
On 9/22/2003 4:50 PM, Berin Lautenbach wrote:
From: Rodent of Unusual Size
what's the role of the incubator pmc in this? at the least, it's a set
of passionate asf people who are essentially in agreement about what
makes something a genuine 'apache'-style project, who review the
reports
: Re: roles and responsibilities
From: Stephen McConnell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?IncubatorMussings
Steve,
Had a read. Great stuff :.
One question to all that I have been trying to
get clear in my head. What is the break up of
responsibility
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Berin,
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?IncubatorMussings
Had a read. Great stuff :.
At a quick glance, I see some things to change.
- there has not been stated a minimum community size to start
The document does state the a candidate
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?IncubatorMussings
Had a read. Great stuff :.
At a quick glance, I see some things to change.
- there has not been stated a minimum community size to start
The document does state the a candidate *shall* [have] a community of at
least three persons
Go for it!
Did. Done. But I did not incorporate the other comments relating directly
to Berin's question, so ...
I'm still thinking about Berin's questions but I think your response
makes sence - (I'm thinking about actual scenarios and how this may
pan-out with an eye for the potential
From: Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In my view, the Sponsoring PMC *should* take an active role. But the
Incubator PMC is still responsible for making sure that all of criteria are
met before letting it into the ASF proper. Looking over the document, the
Sponsoring PMC would be in the
On 9/21/2003 7:37 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Berin,
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?IncubatorMussings
Had a read. Great stuff :.
At a quick glance, I see some things to change.
- there has not been stated a minimum community size to start
Minimum size is not
Ted Leung wrote:
Minimum size is not enough here. There also needs to be a diversity
requirement. For example XMLBeans must have no more than 50% of its
committers from a single organization.
Good exit criteria.
--- Noel
64 matches
Mail list logo
