On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 9:14 AM, Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitt...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Sam suggested asking prodlings in category 2 to report back again next > month on their progress towards solving the mentioned issues.
Hey, now don't go and start spreading false rumors here. Particularly as the archives are available for all to review. :-) Sam's suggestion was to do that IF THEY WERE STALLED. In particular what I said, and I quote, was: "If there are plans, and there is evidence of recent progress towards resolving the issue, fine." > I think > that's perhaps a bit too aggressive (most of these issues take more > than a month to solve) so I'd be happy to just raise awareness of the > issue within the podlings and ask for a summary of actions and > progress in their May report. I've included wording like that in the > report summary on the wiki page. Feel free to edit if another approach > would be better. What I would like to see is the Incubator start identifying PPMCs that are stalled, and to consider what information they need (in future reports) to help them (us) make such a determination. I am not suggesting that this be made retroactive. Or that it be done immediately. A plan would be fine: i.e., setting a date by which the IPMC will have decided what information needs to be in such reports, and a schedule by which the PPMCs need to start providing said information. > [1] http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/February2012?action=diff&rev1=78&rev2=79 > > BR, > > Jukka Zitting - Sam Ruby --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
