The ever-present, never-defined "oversight" term seems to imply more of an event interface -- "raise issues," "notify PMC," "make sure things happen" -- than just passive review / reporting. However you slice it, knowing when to "jump in" (maybe less and less over time if the mentors are not active / become inactive in the coding) is key. That's what we should be able to count on from the ASF members involved with incubating projects (mentors, PPMC members, others).
I also agree with Noel's points about not building excessive dependencies or artificial roles for individual members. Therefore, IMO what is required is *multiple* ASF members / experienced committers participating actively on each of the different PPMCs and some means of tracking who is looking after what. As long as we can ensure this, the community (for successful incubating projects) should naturally be absorbed into the "strange attractor" of a healthy ASF project and Berin's concerns about things being missed should be addressed.
Phil
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
