On Tue Dec 30 2014 at 1:26:31 PM Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 7:26 AM, John D. Ament <john.d.am...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Absolutely not just noise. Take the extra 2 seconds to add your sign > off. > > > > > > > I disagree. Checking a check box is much different than adding > meaningful > > comments, either on mailing lists or on the report itself. > > > > For example, which gives you better info that I feel confident in > Tamaya's > > board report. > > > > My check here: https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/December2014 > > > > or my comments in this thread: > > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-tamaya- > dev/201411.mbox/%3CCAOqetn8wkYuDNkTwkpKKOGzu%3Ds_cf4VMT5A9_e8mdpM6mOh-6Q% > 40mail.gmail.com%3E > > > > All the check does (from my point of view) is give someone a brief > summary > > that things are looking good. The check mark doesn't imply any due > > diligence on the mentor's part. It's very misleading to see it that way. > > Take a look for example at the log4cxx2 podling's report. It has mentor > > sign off, but the contents are barely present. The only reason it has > > mentor sign off is because the mentor wrote the report, after I (as the > > shepherd) reminded the podling. > > > > John, > > Are you seriously suggesting that the board should be delving into all the > incubator mailing lists to determine whether you are paying attention to > your mentoree groups? > No, not in the slightest. But someone needs to look at it. Our current notion of a board report is completely on the honour system. It doesn't safeguard from the chance (which from what I can tell is more often the case) of a mentor writing and signing a report saying it's good to go. You can see some examples of this effect here: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/logging-log4cxx-dev/201412.mbox/%3C1418063938.3890690.200338789.1D0EE7B3%40webmail.messagingengine.com%3E There are also cases where there are clear issues w/ the podling but aren't getting communicated properly on the report (or maybe just oversight?) http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ripple-dev/201412.mbox/%3CBY2PR03MB490FFD83B71E97C269A12DF99660%40BY2PR03MB490.namprd03.prod.outlook.com%3E My point is that just because there's a checkbox checked doesn't mean there's issues. Maybe what would help is to have, during shepherd perhaps, some coaxing in to putting more into the issues for the IPMC/board section. Maybe it's more of a "don't hesitate to put something in that area" thing that needs to happen. John > > The check-box is the concise way that you indicate that the activity on the > mailing lists is happening. There is a known defect with checkboxes in > that they can be ticked without mentoring activity behind them, but that > doesn't mean that we should introduce a new failure mechanism where there > is good activity but no tick box. > > Yes, the tick box is supposed to be an echo. It is a redundant > summarization. And it is very helpful because all the tick boxes are in > one place for easier review. >
