On Oct 12, 2006, at 3:09 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
The Mentors can and should engage the community on best practices.
When the Incubator PMC is presented with a release to approve, we
ought to focus on actual requirements, such as:
Licensing
Notification
Signing (if we choose to enforce this)
...
I would say that the IPMC should focus on the process the podling
used to prepare the release. Oversight from the Mentors or other
IPMC members on the PPMC should mean that by time the release is
presented to the IPMC the requirements already have been met.
Your predicate has not been met in far too many cases, and the
Incubator PMC
has the obligation to make sure that the requirements (summarized
above)
have been met.
I realize, I think that's an area we can improve :-)
This not only ensures that the release content meets the ASF
requirements but also that the PPMC members know what is involved.
How can we help change things so that this is the case? Other than
wait for
Robert's scanning tool? :-)
The biggest help IMO would be what you said in the original post:
"Mentors can and should engage the community on best practices." One
thing that is almost certain to be new for a podling is the ASF
release process and requirements. Best practice in this case is how
to make sure that a release meets them.
This is one area where active participation by existing ASF people is
of direct benefit; if they are Mentors or others with IPMC votes that
also helps the IPMC fulfill its obligations as their involvement in
the process of producing the release can provide valuable background
information. By involvement I mean from an oversight/mentoring
perspective, actual execution should be done by the podling community
as they will be the ones responsible after graduation.
--
Jeremy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
