So, I hate to bring this up, but I think we're at a stalemate for the sentry podling for this month. We tend to not include a podlings report if there are no mentor sign offs. It seems like the mentors aren't inclined to sign off based on some of the issues that have popped up.
On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 12:35 PM Patrick Hunt <ph...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi David, you and Joe have been doing great, I'm afraid I've been > distracted with more issues at home/work than usual. I've been > concerned, and this is more serious than usual given the fact that > both the community and the oversight missed a serious issue, but given > the current feedback and the response (ongoing) from the community we > should be able to get things back on track. > > Thanks, > > Patrick > > On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 3:14 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Patrick Hunt <ph...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Ted can you give some concrete examples, because I see some good > feedback > >> along with folks attempting to address the feedback. Processes updated > or > >> re-iterated, etc... I haven't seen any comments like "stop the presses > >> till... is addressed" and that being ignored. More along the lines of an > >> issue being raised and the community immediately working to address it. > For > >> example most recently giving more time to construct the board report. > >> > >> Failing to cc general@ on the vote is a serious issue. That's part of > the > >> release process though, it's documented and been followed in previous > >> releases. Human error this time around afaict (along with the mentors, > >> myself included, who didn't notice it till later) > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SENTRY/How+to+Release > >> > >>> They seem oblivious to process issues > >> > >> Are there specific process issues that are missing and should hold up a > >> vote? I see alot of process related details on their wiki > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SENTRY/Home > >> > >> Patrick > >> > > > > > > Patrick, > > > > I agree with most of what you wrote. In many ways I'm worried that > > this is a failure on the part of mentors. Very early, this morning in > > Tokyo, it dawned on me that perhaps the mentors (esp. me) are part of > > the problem. This isn't the first time that issues have been called > > out with Sentry - and there does seem to be willingness to address > > issues on the part of the project. 'We keep saying $n is problematic' > > - and I worry (and am certainly guilty in my case) of assuming > > everyone largely 'gets it'. I've also not shown them specific concrete > > examples of some types of non-problematic behavior. By the time most > > folks become a member, or join the IPMC, the Apache way of doing > > things is second nature, and we don't always realize that it may be > > completely foreign to folks who haven't been doing it for as long. > > > > I've just sent a long email to dev@ to hopefully make this clearer, > > call out some examples, and hopefully generate a discussion on how we > > move forward. > > > > --David > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
