On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Ross Gardler <ross.gard...@microsoft.com> wrote: > Mentors, in my opinion, are not responsible for their podlings. They are > responsible for guiding the podlings but not for filing. > > Mentors do have a responsibility to the IPMC to make a recommendation (e.g. > "I've looked into the failure to report and am happy with the status, it's > just busy people this month" or "Looks to me like the podling community > don't take reporting seriously. As a mentor I've tried but failed to > communicate the importance this.")
When is that responsibility to the IPMC discharged? Only when a shepherd, or a random volunteer, inquires? If a podling fails to report indefinitely, do we have any expectation that its Mentors will act? I suppose that as an individual volunteer I can start threads about the podlings that are not reporting on either private@incubator or general@incubator. It seems wrong to have an independent meddler taking on that task, though, instead of the project Mentors. I think this illustrates again why the "shepherd" institution as implemented by the Incubator is pernicious. Incubator shepherds shouldn't own the task of checking up on podlings -- they are unreliable and their responsibility is ephemeral. It should instead be Mentors performing shepherding tasks, since Mentors are assigned to podlings durably and are accountable to the IPMC. Marvin Humphrey --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
