(so sorry, I think my fingers got a little antsy and sent a blank reply)
+1 on #1
+1 on #2 given the clarification later in the thread.
+1 on #3. I don't view it as a burden to leave a comment. Most of the
time, I can just parrot events I was involved with, or a slightly more
detailed version of what you're asking the podling to share in point #2.
John D. Ament wrote:
All,
The Incubator PMC has received feedback from the board that changes may
need to be made to the structure of our report. Specifically, there is
confusion from the board members over how podlings get classified. There
is also a request to increase and improve mentor feedback on podling
reports. Based on this input, I would like to propose the following
changes to our report format. I would like to try to implement this for
the March report, if not before then.
1. Eliminate the podling summary section of the report. It shouldn't be on
the report manager to classify each podling. We have begun leveraging a
maturity model for podlings, while its not required to fulfill it serves as
an equivalent to this section. The list of podlings who failed to report
shall remain.
2. Add a "Podling Maturity Assessment" to the individual podling reports.
This would give a clear opportunity for each podling to describe how they
are doing, perhaps compared to the maturity model or our classic categories.
3. Change the mentor sign off section to include a per-mentor comment.
E.g. instead of the current:
[ ](podling) mentor1
[ ](podling) mentor2
[ ](podling) mentor3
It would be:
[ ](podling) mentor1
Comments:
[ ](podling) mentor2
Comments:
[ ](podling) mentor3
Comments:
And rename Shepherd/Mentor notes: to just "Shepherd notes:"
Thoughts?
John
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
