I, for one, don't feel slighted in the least. In fact, I applaud the Champion and the Mentors and especially the (proposed) podling for having a clear idea on how they wish this effort to go. They decided that 3 mentors was the optimal number for them, and have stuck to their guns. Good for them!
> On Dec 5, 2015, at 12:41 PM, Ross Gardler <ross.gard...@microsoft.com> wrote: > > Nobody is turned away. Mentors don't do the work. Contributors do. Mentors do > not make decisions. Contributors so. Mentors have " binding votes" but that > is just because of the structure we have in the ASF, a good mentor will only > ever use that vote to enact the wishes of the community. This is the opposite > of "counter cultural". Contributors are what matter not mentors. > > See recent discussions in the topic of mentors and how many people. Some > people, myself included, feel the role of mentor had changed over the years. > In this project we want it to go back to what it was and should be. Advisors > only. We don't want anyone in the pushing to feel mentors have authority. We > want excellent community candidates to demonstrate how merit it's earned > around here. That can include by giving advise from experience within the > ASF, but it will be the podling who decide who is contributing constructively > and therefore vote then in as committers. > > Note this is nothing to do with any individual. I'll pick on Jim as we know > one another (and in fact Jim is a supporter of the one mentor model). Jim has > an untold amount of expertise to offer this project. I imagine, if he had the > time to offer, he'll become a committer quickly. The same will be true for > anyone else who contributes. > > Ross > > Sent from my Windows Phone > ________________________________ > From: Tim Williams<mailto:william...@gmail.com> > Sent: 12/5/2015 5:08 AM > To: general@incubator.apache.org<mailto:general@incubator.apache.org> > Subject: Re: [PORPOSAL] Fineract > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Ross Gardler > <ross.gard...@microsoft.com> wrote: >> I'm replying top of thread as this is a general reply regarding mentors. >> >> We just added Greg Stein as a third mentor. He wasn't on the originally >> submitted proposal as he was just checking on availability before confirming. >> >> Based on recent conversations in the IPMC I (as champion) advised the >> project stick to a single mentor who was willing to put his/her head on the >> block. This individual would take full responsibility for rapid turnaround >> on all items needing mentor feedback. However, the team had already >> discussed the proposal with a number of other people. As a result they feel >> that 3 mentors is appropriate, respecting both IPMC traditions and those >> already advising the community. Hence we have three mentors. We are not >> seeking more. > > This isn't about "seeking more" - literally a perfectly qualified > [potential] mentor fell in your lap. Do what you want, this just > feels incredibly counter-cultural to me - that is, to actively turn > away an eminently qualified volunteer. I think it's both unwise in > this specific instance and a poor example to hint that its > acceptable/desirable in general. > > Anyway, best wishes to Fineract... > > Thanks, > --tim > > ** Just to be clear, I'm well aware that the other three mentors are > rock solid as well:) > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
