On Apr 10, 2007, at 7:46 PM, Craig L Russell wrote:
I'm confused.
I can imagine. I think everyone is confused. That's what you get when
you try and write these process descriptions so formally, since the
actual process is not as formal. The "A mentor is... a permanent
member of the [ASF]" description on that page is wrong insofar that
it doesn't reflect reality. In fact, the entire description of a
mentor is a bit off if you ask me.
> A Mentor is a role undertaken by a permanent member of the Apache
Software Foundation
nope. But they're always committers and they always know "how the ASF
works" (insofar as anyone knows :-)).
> and is chosen by the Sponsor
nope. Mentors are chosen by the podling, the incubator PMC, the
Sponsor, or themselves. "I'll volunteer to mentor if you'll have me"
is a common phrase.
> to actively lead in the discharge of their duties (listed above).
I don't see that list. It's a confusing sentence to me. "Mentors work
to make sure no mentoring is needed, i.e. make sure that the podling
becomes a self-managing community" seems clearer to me.
> Upon acceptance by the Incubator PMC, the Mentor automatically
becomes a member of the Incubator PMC.
Not completely true. They have to subscribe (or be subscribed to) to
the private@ mailing list, the subscription request must be approved,
an e-mail must be sent to private@, and then the Incubator VP must
send a request for an ACK message to the board@, then the board has
to ACK, and then the Incubator VP must update a file in SVN, and then
they're a PMC member. The "automatic" word comes from the fact that
the IPMC doesn't vote on this seperately.
> A Mentor has specific responsibilities towards the Incubator PMC,
the Sponsor and towards the members of the assigned Podling.
Hrmpf. A mentor has rather undefined and vague responsibilities,
namely to "do mentoring".
The Process Description [1] seems to be clear:
The Mentor is automatically made a member of the Incubator PMC
See above. Of course this implies that when the IPMC votes on a
proposal it'd better check that it accepts the mentoring list. Of
course, it's really hard to figure out whether a particular person
would be a good mentor for a particular project in a particular
timeframe. Fortunately, it is always easy to add a mentor, or for a
non-mentor to fill in a few mentoring gaps.
, and reports to both the PMC and the Sponsor about your overall
health and suitability for eventual inclusion within the Apache
Community (or recommendation to terminate).
Hmm. The podling community as a whole should be responsible for
reporting. Mentors can (and do) fill the gap until the community is
self-managing.
If there should be a separate vote, there's no mention of it
anywhere. Is this just old information in need of updating?
Well it seems it does need updating, but no, there's no seperate vote.
Or is it the intent that after receiving a Sponsor's request to the
Incubator to accept a candidate, someone on the IPMC starts a vote
to accept the non-Member proposed Mentor(s) as an IPMC member?
Nope.
And then separately, the IPMC votes to accept the candidate as a
podling? The implication is that if not all proposed Mentors are
IPMC members, the vote to accept the candidate is out of order.
I'll be happy to propose a patch once I understand what it should say.
Thanks Craig! Process descriptions always seem hard to read and
write, ways to improve the wording are always sought...
- Leo
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
