I'd like to raise a topic directly related to the succession. To start, three cheers for Roman for all his hard work!
For all other projects in the Foundation, we say, 'The chair is just a clerk who facilitates communications with the board.' Here at the IPMC, we expect the chair to be moderator of a very fractious set of arguments about how to incubate (or whether to even have an incubator). A leader, even. This strikes me as odd. It is my impression that no one is very happy with the current state of the incubation process. On the other hand, I'm sure, from extensive personal experience, that the IPMC's size is a serious impediment to addressing its issues. It's just very, very, hard to reach consensus at this scale. So, is there an alternative to attempting to find a hero to pull the sword from the stone? My proposal is to form a select committee. This committee would accept the job of creating a comprehensive proposal for where to go with integration. It would, of course, deliberate in public, but the members of the committee would be the only 'committers' on the proposal. The committee would not be required to find a consensus of the entire IPMC, let alone all of members@. The committee would make interim reports to the board so that the proposal could be tuned, incrementally, to be one that the board could accept. This would allow the next IPMC chair to be sign up only to be the sort of modest bureaucrat that we usually talk about. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
