On Sunday, July 26, 2015, Don Bosco Durai <bo...@apache.org> wrote: > My only concern is now the mentor(s) need to check everything before > approving. In my experience, during the early stages of the releases, lot > of the license, naming, release location, etc. related issues were > identified during the approval in the general@ list. Which were very > helpful to us. > > I agree, but nothing prevents that the mentor ask when in doubt, especially the first one, we do not need to force every release to pass general@ for that ( unless we don't trust the mentors).
rgds jan i > Knowing that the mentors are generally busy, it might be good to have an > extra oversight. > > >Take a poll among podlings and ask "Do you want to be more autonomous > >from the IPMC?" and see what they say... > We should qualify what "autonomous" means here. > > > Thanks > > Bosco > > > > On 7/26/15, 8:06 AM, "Niclas Hedhman" <nic...@hedhman.org <javascript:;>> > wrote: > > >On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 7:38 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > >> The only downside of this proposal is that it assumes that every podling > >> has at least three active (!) mentors. > > > >No, I don't necessarily mean that you need 3 mentors either. One active > >mentor would be fine with me. Empower the podling to stand on its own > >feet. > >The Incubation disclaimers are plenty warning, otherwise it would be full > >releases. > > > >Take a poll among podlings and ask "Do you want to be more autonomous from > >the IPMC?" and see what they say... > > > >Cheers > >-- > >Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer > >http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > <javascript:;> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > <javascript:;> > > -- Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings.
