On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 4:02 PM, P. Taylor Goetz wrote:
> Mentors are, by definition, either:
>
> A) ASF Members
> B) someone who has shown enough understanding of the Apache Way to be
> invited to the IPMC (and should at least be considered for membership,
> IMHO).
>
In at least one case, a men
Mentors are, by definition, either:
A) ASF Members
B) someone who has shown enough understanding of the Apache Way to be invited
to the IPMC (and should at least be considered for membership, IMHO).
I would think that in either case, they should know how/when/why to check their
corporate affili
On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 02:45PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> Producing good code is a community effort. When it comes down to just the
> mentors fix that themselves, there is something wrong with the community of
> the podling.
>
> This discussion is not about what participants do with their mentor hat
On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 06:52PM, Reto Gmür wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Roman Shaposhnik
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 6:07 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> > > Hi Incubator folks,
> > >
> > > I would like to propose we adopt a mentor neutrality policy for
> > > incubating podling
eers,
> > > Chris
> > >
> > > ++
> > > Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
> > > Chief Architect
> > > Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398)
> > > NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> > > Office: 168-519, Mailstop:
ystems Section (398)
> > NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> > Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527
> > Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov
> > WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
> > ++++++
> > Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department
> > University of
; ++
> Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department
> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> ++
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: jpluser
> Reply
But it is basically *core* to who and what we are.
> On Oct 12, 2015, at 10:52 AM, Marko Rodriguez wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>> We hope and trust mentors to wear their hats well.
>
> This quote from a colleague of mine has always stuck with me:
>
> "Hope is not a strategy."
>
> Take care,
> Mar
Hi,
> We hope and trust mentors to wear their hats well.
This quote from a colleague of mine has always stuck with me:
"Hope is not a strategy."
Take care,
Marko.
http://markorodriguez.com
>
>> On Oct 9, 2015, at 11:07 AM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>>
>> Hi Incubator folks,
>>
>> I wou
I understand your concern but, at present, I don't see it
being an issue nor something that we need worry about.
We hope and trust mentors to wear their hats well.
> On Oct 9, 2015, at 11:07 AM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>
> Hi Incubator folks,
>
> I would like to propose we adopt a mentor neutralit
double whammy."
>
> Full blog at
> http://www.computerworlduk.com/blogs/apache-asserts/apache-openoffice-can-i-depend-on-software-built-by-volunteers--3570412/
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Reto Gmür [mailto:r...@apache.org]
> Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2015 9:53
I said *better* not *more*
-Original Message-
From: Alan D. Cabrera [mailto:l...@toolazydogs.com]
Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2015 2:34 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy
> On Oct 9, 2015, at 8:36 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>
> Per
hammy."
>
> Full blog at
> http://www.computerworlduk.com/blogs/apache-asserts/apache-openoffice-can-i-depend-on-software-built-by-volunteers--3570412/
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Reto Gmür [mailto:r...@apache.org]
> Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2015 9:53 AM
> To:
Daniel Gruno wrote on 10/9/15 3:18 PM:
> On 10/09/2015 08:02 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
...Furthermore, I would like to see this extended to votes on graduating or
>>
> On Oct 9, 2015, at 12:18 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>
> I would imagine no one would object to a policy that says you cannot
> have a binding vote if you have a financial interest in graduating a
> podling,
I would. People on the IPMC and ASF are supposed to be trustworthy out of the
gate.
If
> On Oct 9, 2015, at 11:02 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>>> ...Furthermore, I would like to see this extended to votes on graduating or
>>> retiring podlings,..
>>
>> IMO
I’m -1 on on this. The whole premise of the ASF is that it is a meritocracy
and that volunteers at various “levels” of the organization have attained their
status because they are trustworthy. Without this premise, the ASF falls apart.
Finally, it’s not clear to me that this addresses the prob
> On Oct 9, 2015, at 8:36 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>
> Personally I would focus more on better oversight of podling and mentor
> activity. The goal is to catch the occasional problem case rather than put
> restrictions in place. I'm not sure how to do that though. I and others have
> made many
ache.org]
Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2015 9:53 AM
To: general
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Roman Shaposhnik
wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 6:07 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> > Hi Incubator folks,
> >
> > I would like to
Is there something else going on that I am not aware of? Is someone using
undue influence where they shouldn’t be?
On the Legal list dealing with hypothetical situations is continually avoided.
While a code of conduct for mentors might make sense, penalizing mentors who
are trying to educate
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Roman Shaposhnik
wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 6:07 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> > Hi Incubator folks,
> >
> > I would like to propose we adopt a mentor neutrality policy for
> > incubating podlings:
> >
> > - A mentor must not be financially tied to the project
I'm -1 on this.
We have people working for companies who have a vested interest probably on
most PMC's at Apache and why should we have a different set of rules for
the Incubator PMC than any other PMC? If there is a specific concerns that
an individual is acting against the ASF's best interest, t
On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 9:47 AM Daniel Gruno wrote:
> On 10/11/2015 03:44 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 9:36 AM Daniel Gruno
> wrote:
> >
> >> On 10/11/2015 03:34 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
> >>>
> Am 11.10.2015 um 14:45 schrieb Pierre Smits :
>
> Producing go
On 10/11/2015 03:44 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 9:36 AM Daniel Gruno wrote:
>
>> On 10/11/2015 03:34 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
>>>
Am 11.10.2015 um 14:45 schrieb Pierre Smits :
Producing good code is a community effort. When it comes down to just
>> the
m
On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 9:36 AM Daniel Gruno wrote:
> On 10/11/2015 03:34 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
> >
> >> Am 11.10.2015 um 14:45 schrieb Pierre Smits :
> >>
> >> Producing good code is a community effort. When it comes down to just
> the
> >> mentors fix that themselves, there is something wron
On 10/11/2015 03:34 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
>
>> Am 11.10.2015 um 14:45 schrieb Pierre Smits :
>>
>> Producing good code is a community effort. When it comes down to just the
>> mentors fix that themselves, there is something wrong with the community of
>> the podling.
>
> I never questioned tha
> Am 11.10.2015 um 14:45 schrieb Pierre Smits :
>
> Producing good code is a community effort. When it comes down to just the
> mentors fix that themselves, there is something wrong with the community of
> the podling.
I never questioned that.
But the proposal sounds that a mentor _must not_ c
Producing good code is a community effort. When it comes down to just the
mentors fix that themselves, there is something wrong with the community of
the podling.
This discussion is not about what participants do with their mentor hat on
in the podling. I expect we all appreciate what mentors do w
-1
Mentors who have no interest (financially or purely technical doesn’t matter in
the end) will not find enough time to _really_ look into the projects health.
Be honest with yourself: how much do you look into the code if you are not
working on it yourself? How could you then detect that code
This is all SO insane! Sounds like a war program.
Cheers from JavaX - we now have auto-migrating programs.
Stefan
Am 09.10.2015 17:07 schrieb "Daniel Gruno" :
> Hi Incubator folks,
>
> I would like to propose we adopt a mentor neutrality policy for
> incubating podlings:
>
> - A mentor must not
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 09:05PM, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 10.10.2015 20:11, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 09:06AM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> >> On 10/10/2015 07:51 AM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
> >>> We should address perceived, and certainly provable, instances of
> >>> corruption
USA
> ++
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: jpluser
> Reply-To: "general@incubator.apache.org"
> Date: Friday, October 9, 2015 at 5:14 PM
> To: "general@incubator.apache.org&
On 10.10.2015 14:05, Pierre Smits wrote:
> Since we're conducting ASF politics here, you're asserting that you're
> corrupt, anti-social and a nutcase?
> And the rest of privileged contributors of the ASF as well?
Are you deliberately misunderstanding what I wrote? If not, I suggest
you go and rea
On 10.10.2015 20:11, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 09:06AM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>> On 10/10/2015 07:51 AM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
>>> We should address perceived, and certainly provable, instances of
>>> corruption at the Foundation directly, rather than prescribe policy that
>
> > Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department
> > University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> > ++++++++++
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Mes
++
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-----
> From: jpluser
> Reply-To: "general@incubator.apache.org"
> Date: Friday, October 9, 2015 at 5:14 PM
> To: "general@incubator.apache.org"
> S
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 09:06AM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> On 10/10/2015 07:51 AM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
> > We should address perceived, and certainly provable, instances of
> > corruption at the Foundation directly, rather than prescribe policy that
> > seeks to prevent future instances as if there i
++
-Original Message-
From: jpluser
Reply-To: "general@incubator.apache.org"
Date: Friday, October 9, 2015 at 5:14 PM
To: "general@incubator.apache.org"
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy
>I do not agree with this proposal I will elaborate mor
Since we're conducting ASF politics here, you're asserting that you're
corrupt, anti-social and a nutcase?
And the rest of privileged contributors of the ASF as well?
Best regards,
Pierre Smits
*OFBiz Extensions Marketplace*
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
On 10.10.2015 09:06, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> On 10/10/2015 07:51 AM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
>> We should address perceived, and certainly provable, instances of
>> corruption at the Foundation directly, rather than prescribe policy that
>> seeks to prevent future instances as if there is a precedent (
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 6:07 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> Hi Incubator folks,
>
> I would like to propose we adopt a mentor neutrality policy for
> incubating podlings:
>
> - A mentor must not be financially tied to the project or its incubation
> status.
I'm very strongly -1 on this for two reasons.
On 10/10/2015 Daniel Gruno wrote:
I'm not suggesting we start auditing people. As later clarified, I am
suggesting people recuse themselves from voting if they (or others?)
feel that they have economic or other corporate interests that may cloud
either their judgment or their perceived judgment.
On 10/10/2015 07:51 AM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
> We should address perceived, and certainly provable, instances of
> corruption at the Foundation directly, rather than prescribe policy that
> seeks to prevent future instances as if there is a precedent (but there
> isn't one here... at least one not
We should address perceived, and certainly provable, instances of
corruption at the Foundation directly, rather than prescribe policy that
seeks to prevent future instances as if there is a precedent (but there
isn't one here... at least one not spoken aloud, right?).
> A mentor must not be financ
I do not agree with this proposal I will elaborate more later
Sent from my iPhone
> On Oct 9, 2015, at 8:07 AM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>
> Hi Incubator folks,
>
> I would like to propose we adopt a mentor neutrality policy for
> incubating podlings:
>
> - A mentor must not be financially tied to
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 01:29AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> What are you referring to, Konstantin?
I am referring to the progressives of the world and all "policy frameworks"
they are so readily unleashing on everybody because they have an urge to
meddle. I am very much agree with Chris and Ross on imm
What are you referring to, Konstantin?
Best regards,
Pierre Smits
*OFBiz Extensions Marketplace*
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 1:31 AM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 08:36PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> > Does there always have to be an actual problem b
On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 08:36PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> Does there always have to be an actual problem before we can propose a
> policy? must we always be reactive instead of proactive?
"We can't just stay on a side and wait, we should do something!" - sounds all
too familiar, eh?
> Yes, I am in a
On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 11:38AM, Greg Trasuk wrote:
> Hi Daniel:
>
> Discussion intertwined below…
>
> Cheers,
>
> Greg Trasuk
>
> > On Oct 9, 2015, at 11:07 AM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> >
> > Hi Incubator folks,
> >
> > I would like to propose we adopt a mentor neutrality policy for
> > incuba
t; From: Pierre Smits [mailto:pierre.sm...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 9, 2015 2:26 PM
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy
>
> Meaning: proactively trying to doing the right thing, trying to define
> boundaries before wrongdo
No. Meaning that starting from a place of no-trust in an environment where
trust is critical is wrong.
Ross
-Original Message-
From: Pierre Smits [mailto:pierre.sm...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, October 9, 2015 2:26 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor
Meaning: proactively trying to doing the right thing, trying to define
boundaries before wrongdoing happens, is wrong?
Best regards,
Pierre Smits
*OFBiz Extensions Marketplace*
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 10:51 PM, Chris Douglas wrote:
> Daniel-
>
> If you have these
Daniel-
If you have these concerns about mentors, a TLP proposal, or even an
active TLP substantiated only by private information: notify the board
via board-private@. That's why it's there.
The proposal accuses mentors of selling influence, and acting contrary
to the foundation's interest. That
On 10/09/2015 08:02 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>>> ...Furthermore, I would like to see this extended to votes on graduating or
>>> retiring podlings,..
>>
>> IMO this is where
Does there always have to be an actual problem before we can propose a
policy? must we always be reactive instead of proactive?
Yes, I am in a way implying that some mentors are, perhaps, not neutral
in their work. I will not back it up with specific names or contexts, as
I don't want to take a tr
What problem does this solve?
This proposal lacks context. It implies that mentors are not neutral,
and that they are motivated by interests not shared by the ASF. But it
does not outline the merits of that belief, neither does it specify
how this proposal would address them. Instead of allowing t
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>> ...Furthermore, I would like to see this extended to votes on graduating or
>> retiring podlings,..
>
> IMO this is where independence is important. We could require that 3
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> ...Furthermore, I would like to see this extended to votes on graduating or
> retiring podlings,..
IMO this is where independence is important. We could require that 3
"organizationally independent" IPMC members review each podling before
Daniel Gruno wrote on 10/9/15 11:07 AM:
> Hi Incubator folks,
>
> I would like to propose we adopt a mentor neutrality policy for
> incubating podlings:
>
> - A mentor must not be financially tied to the project or its incubation
> status.
> - A mentor must not have a vested interest in incubatin
Hi Daniel:
Discussion intertwined below…
Cheers,
Greg Trasuk
> On Oct 9, 2015, at 11:07 AM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>
> Hi Incubator folks,
>
> I would like to propose we adopt a mentor neutrality policy for
> incubating podlings:
>
> - A mentor must not be financially tied to the project or it
t to add
your proposal there).
Ross
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Gruno [mailto:humbed...@apache.org]
Sent: Friday, October 9, 2015 8:07 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy
Hi Incubator folks,
I would like to propose we adopt a mentor neutral
It seems to me that the negatives of your proposed policy outweigh the
positives.
Presumably the goal is to prevent mentors from making biased decisions due to
conflicts of interest. There are other approaches to solving CoI, such as
declaring conflicts of interest and, Apache’s current approac
Hi Incubator folks,
I would like to propose we adopt a mentor neutrality policy for
incubating podlings:
- A mentor must not be financially tied to the project or its incubation
status.
- A mentor must not have a vested interest in incubating, graduating or
dismantling a podling that goes beyond
63 matches
Mail list logo
