Chris,
As I feel like I've explained 100 times, all of the following are true:
1) I disagree with your proposal
2) I agree with much of your analyses of problems with the IPMC
3) I I trying to do a job of consensus moderation as best I understand
how, being fair to you and to all the involuntary
-Original Message-
From: Joseph Schaefer
Reply-To: "general@incubator.apache.org"
Date: Saturday, May 11, 2013 8:24 AM
To: "general@incubator.apache.org"
Subject: Re: [META DISCUSS] talking about the overall state of this PMC
>I firmly believe our priority in m
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>
>> If you think it's clear in either direction, call a VOTE. I think that's
>> the only demonstrable way to suggest what's clear and what's not.
>
> Please see several emails from Greg and others on the board@ list
> recently pointing out
Phone From: Alan Cabrera
Sent: 11/05/2013 17:46
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [META DISCUSS] talking about the overall state of this PMC
On May 11, 2013, at 5:40 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> A real experiment with 'probationary projects' would have to model the
>
-Original Message-
From: Benson Margulies
Reply-To: "general@incubator.apache.org"
Date: Saturday, May 11, 2013 8:56 AM
To: "general@incubator.apache.org"
Subject: Re: [META DISCUSS] talking about the overall state of this PMC
>>
>> If you think it
Hi Alan,
-Original Message-
From: Alan Cabrera
Reply-To: "general@incubator.apache.org"
Date: Saturday, May 11, 2013 7:01 AM
To: "general@incubator.apache.org"
Subject: Re: [META DISCUSS] talking about the overall state of this PMC
[..snip..]
>
>
>
> If you think it's clear in either direction, call a VOTE. I think that's
> the only demonstrable way to suggest what's clear and what's not.
Please see several emails from Greg and others on the board@ list
recently pointing out the inappropriateness of overuse of votes.
If even *one* person
Benson,
-Original Message-
From: Benson Margulies
Reply-To: "general@incubator.apache.org"
Date: Saturday, May 11, 2013 6:44 AM
To: "general@incubator.apache.org"
Subject: Re: [META DISCUSS] talking about the overall state of this PMC
>[..snip..]
>One poss
I firmly believe our priority in mentoring podlings is to instill
self-governance as early as is feasible, and the proven way to accomplish that
task is to identify suitable members of the podling and elect them to the IPMC
so they are fully empowered to do it. Every other approach is suboptima
On May 11, 2013, at 11:03 AM, "Dennis E. Hamilton"
wrote:
> It's often called a dead-man's switch. I think the term applied originally
> to locomotive engineers and also metro car drivers. (I'm not sure what a
> dead pilot switch could accomplish in an aircraft.)
>
> I think having mentors
effective
dead mentor's switch [;<).
- Dennis
-Original Message-
From: Alan Cabrera [mailto:l...@toolazydogs.com]
Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2013 10:10
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [META DISCUSS] talking about the overall state of this PMC
On May 11, 2013, a
On May 11, 2013, at 7:33 AM, Joseph Schaefer wrote:
> Frankly I find the notion that the board will do a better job of MENTORING
> these projects than the IPMC to be batshit insane, but that's just me.
> We need manpower, and there is plenty of that available amongst the competent
> volunteers w
On May 11, 2013, at 9:44 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> Violating my 24 hour rule just this one, and worse yet to repeat myself:
IMO, I think this is fine so long as it occurs on the weekend. :)
> +1 Joe, Ross, etc.
>
> I rather regret mentioning the direct launch alternative in my most
> rec
On May 11, 2013, at 5:40 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> A real experiment with 'probationary projects' would have to model the
> entire process of a new project launching with _no IPMC_ to
> participate in any way.
Can you explain what problem launching new projects with _no IPMC_ to
participa
Violating my 24 hour rule just this one, and worse yet to repeat myself:
+1 Joe, Ross, etc.
I rather regret mentioning the direct launch alternative in my most
recent email. We have some weakness in _mentoring_, and more weakness
in _supervising_ (or at least in documenting supervision). We have
On May 11, 2013, at 7:26 AM, ant elder wrote:
> I also agree that there isn't consensus in the Incubator PMC to do
> this, but I'm not sure we need it.
Lovely.
Regards,
Alan
It's not just you Joe.
Sent from my Windows Phone From: Joseph Schaefer
Sent: 11/05/2013 15:34
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [META DISCUSS] talking about the overall state of this PMC
Frankly I find the notion that the board will do a better job of MENTORING
these projects
It's not just you Joe.
From: Joseph Schaefer
Sent: 11/05/2013 15:34
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [META DISCUSS] talking about the overall state of this PMC
Frankly I find the notion that the board will do a better job of MENTORING
these projects than the IPMC to be batshit i
Frankly I find the notion that the board will do a better job of MENTORING
these projects than the IPMC to be batshit insane, but that's just me.
We need manpower, and there is plenty of that available amongst the competent
volunteers who actively participate in these projects. Let's just do
what'
Actually I wasn't thinking it would be you Benson who talked to the
board. There are several directors here including a couple on this
thread who've said they support trying this so i thought they could
bring it up informally at the upcoming meeting just to get us an idea
if this is something the b
I'm not going to ask the May board meeting anything. There's no
consensus of this community on 'probationary projects', and, more to
the point, there are a host of details required to make that a viable
proposal and no one has filled them in. As I wrote in the report, I
plan to have a discussion wi
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 5:33 PM, Eric Johnson wrote:
> If this was a software project, and the appropriate answer was unknown, they
> you might apply a "lean startup" approach, and figure out how to run tests
> to see which way works best.
>
> Given the number of incubating projects, should be eas
Lean startup approaches make sense when you do not know the problem that you're
solving. You perform experiments and pivot as you blindly search for a domain
whose problems you can solve and make money doing it.
Here, we know what our problems are.
This is not to say that we should not collect
On May 10, 2013, at 9:25 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> So, here we have:
>
> Alan's idea of removing champions and shepherds and demanding mentor
> recommitment, with the 'teeth' of putting podlings on ice if they
> can't muster an adequate mentor squad.
>
> My idea of asking champions to step
If this was a software project, and the appropriate answer was unknown,
they you might apply a "lean startup" approach, and figure out how to
run tests to see which way works best.
Given the number of incubating projects, should be easy to run some
experiments. Then you just need to build up s
So, here we have:
Alan's idea of removing champions and shepherds and demanding mentor
recommitment, with the 'teeth' of putting podlings on ice if they
can't muster an adequate mentor squad.
My idea of asking champions to step up to some specific supervision
responsibility, thus allowing some fl
Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity
On 8 May 2013 02:20, "Bertrand Delacretaz" wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Ross Gardler
> wrote:
> > ...I've made a proposal for giving the IPMC teeth but it hasn't gained
> > support..
>
> URL?
Sorry, working from mobile
On May 8, 2013, at 1:47 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> The probationary PMC proposal of Chris' which Greg is championing
> gives teeth to the whole process. That's what the IPMC needs - teeth.
Shuttling the kids off to the grandparents, even if they have all their teeth,
is not the way to go. :)
On May 8, 2013, at 5:16 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Benson Margulies
> wrote:
>> ...I continue to hope for consensus on the thing I wrote...
>
> I had another look at
> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/BensonApril2013ProcessProposals and I
> like it.
>
>
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> ...I continue to hope for consensus on the thing I wrote...
I had another look at
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/BensonApril2013ProcessProposals and I
like it.
While asking all podlings to confirm their current champion (which
your pro
I perceive here that we have reached a favorite knot: the tension
between 'mentor as coach' and 'mentor as supervisor'.
This PMC's job, as delegated by the board, is supervision. If the
mentors don't supervise, who will?
On the other hand, the very term, 'mentor', is much more suggestive of
'coac
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Ross Gardler
wrote:
> ...I've made a proposal for giving the IPMC teeth but it hasn't gained
> support..
URL?
> ...In the absence of something else with teeth then I'm +1 for
> probationary TLPs as proposed by Chris as long as we stop accepting
> projects that ar
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 10:51 AM, ant elder wrote:
> On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 2:56 AM, Benson Margulies
> wrote:
>>
>> Discussions on Ross' and Chris' proposals ground to a halt.
>>
>> In my view, there are real issues that drove those discussions, even if
>> those discussions drove some of us to d
On 7 May 2013 21:15, Greg Stein wrote:
> On a whole different direction, one way to "scale" is to shift from
> Incubator-managed podlings to Board-managed. The podling would
> effectively be a "TLP on probation". The Champion, Mentors, and Board
> would be providing oversight.
>
> I would posit th
On May 7, 2013, at 10:27 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 12:58 AM, Alan Cabrera wrote:
>>
>> On May 7, 2013, at 9:15 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>>
>>> On a whole different direction, one way to "scale" is to shift from
>>> Incubator-managed podlings to Board-managed. The podling wo
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 12:58 AM, Alan Cabrera wrote:
>
> On May 7, 2013, at 9:15 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>
>> On a whole different direction, one way to "scale" is to shift from
>> Incubator-managed podlings to Board-managed. The podling would
>> effectively be a "TLP on probation". The Champion, M
You go girl! Spot on.
Sent from my iPhone
On May 8, 2013, at 12:54 AM, Alan Cabrera wrote:
>
> On May 7, 2013, at 4:03 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 5:45 AM, Alan Cabrera wrote:
>>> ...Let's get rid of champions and shepherds and hold the mentors to their
>>
On May 7, 2013, at 9:15 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On a whole different direction, one way to "scale" is to shift from
> Incubator-managed podlings to Board-managed. The podling would
> effectively be a "TLP on probation". The Champion, Mentors, and Board
> would be providing oversight.
>
> I woul
On May 7, 2013, at 4:03 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 5:45 AM, Alan Cabrera wrote:
>> ...Let's get rid of champions and shepherds and hold the mentors to their
>> responsibilities
>
> The problem with mentors is when you have 5 of them it's unclear who's
> in cha
++
-Original Message-
From: Greg Stein
Reply-To: "general@incubator.apache.org"
Date: Tuesday, May 7, 2013 9:15 PM
To: "general@incubator.apache.org"
Subject: Re: [META DISCUSS] talking about the overall state of this PMC
&
On a whole different direction, one way to "scale" is to shift from
Incubator-managed podlings to Board-managed. The podling would
effectively be a "TLP on probation". The Champion, Mentors, and Board
would be providing oversight.
I would posit that the Board is more capable of oversight than the
Not really. It's a heartbeat/health-check like any other distributed,
unreliable system. I was tempted to say it's a social implementation of
STONITH, but that might send the wrong message. ;)
On 8 May 2013 00:53, Ross Gardler wrote:
> On 7 May 2013 08:56, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> > On Tue
On 7 May 2013 08:56, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Tim Williams wrote:
>> ...I signed up to *mentor* not send silly heartbeat
>> checks that exist because other podling's mentors failed to live up to
>> their responsibility...
>
> 0 0 1 * * echo "Hi, the FOO podli
On 7 May 2013 16:55, Upayavira wrote:
> I guess that could be automated (grep through mail
> archives for mentor email addresses each month), but until that
> happens[...]
>
This could be done in a one-off fashion with a simple sh pipe. I'm not fond
of to addressing social problems with technolo
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Tim Williams wrote:
> ...I signed up to *mentor* not send silly heartbeat
> checks that exist because other podling's mentors failed to live up to
> their responsibility...
0 0 1 * * echo "Hi, the FOO podling is alive." | mail -s "Hi folks"
general@incubator.apac
The problem that most podlings I've been involved with, whilst having
six mentors, have ended up with just me playing any part. On paper, it
looks like these podlings are in a great place, in fact, they only have
a single active mentor.
What is wanted is to know who is, and who isn't active. To sp
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 11:20 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> There was a consensus to add the Champion role, and we haven't even
> tried it seriously, and now you propose to eliminate it. That doesn't
> seem reasonable to me. I'd rather try to make it useful and then
> evaluate it. In other words,
There was a consensus to add the Champion role, and we haven't even
tried it seriously, and now you propose to eliminate it. That doesn't
seem reasonable to me. I'd rather try to make it useful and then
evaluate it. In other words, +1 to Bertrand.
'Holding mentors to their responsibility' as a co
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 5:45 AM, Alan Cabrera wrote:
> ...Let's get rid of champions and shepherds and hold the mentors to their
> responsibilities
The problem with mentors is when you have 5 of them it's unclear who's
in charge exactly.
The goal of the champion's role clarification was to h
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 2:56 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>
> Discussions on Ross' and Chris' proposals ground to a halt.
>
> In my view, there are real issues that drove those discussions, even if
> those discussions drove some of us to distraction.
>
> A bit before the wiki crashed, I wrote:
>
> h
On May 5, 2013, at 6:56 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> Discussions on Ross' and Chris' proposals ground to a halt.
>
> In my view, there are real issues that drove those discussions, even if
> those discussions drove some of us to distraction.
>
> A bit before the wiki crashed, I wrote:
>
> htt
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 9:59 AM, Chen, Pei
wrote:
> I have to agree with Tim here if a champion has to manually generate this
> report: "a monthly report that says simple heartbeat that says podling is
> alive and the mentors are on board"?
> However, I think something like this can be automate
g
> Subject: Re: [META DISCUSS] talking about the overall state of this PMC
>
> On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Benson Margulies
> wrote:
> > Discussions on Ross' and Chris' proposals ground to a halt.
> >
> > In my view, there are real issues that drov
Hi,
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> ...I consider that proposal adopted, and I'm looking to build on it, by
> adding a few specifics...
Sounds good to me - we haven't really acted on the clarifications to
the champion role that we added a while ago to [1], Benson's prop
On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> Discussions on Ross' and Chris' proposals ground to a halt.
>
> In my view, there are real issues that drove those discussions, even if
> those discussions drove some of us to distraction.
>
> A bit before the wiki crashed, I wrote:
>
> htt
> From: Upayavira
> Reply-To: "general@incubator.apache.org"
> Date: Sunday, May 5, 2013 10:43 PM
> To: "general@incubator.apache.org"
> Subject: Re: [META DISCUSS] talking about the overall state of this PMC
>
>>Having read your wiki post, I find it a
013 10:43 PM
To: "general@incubator.apache.org"
Subject: Re: [META DISCUSS] talking about the overall state of this PMC
>Having read your wiki post, I find it a simple, considered upping of the
>game, which I think would be worth the effort of trying, especially as
>the mini-rep
Having read your wiki post, I find it a simple, considered upping of the
game, which I think would be worth the effort of trying, especially as
the mini-reports don't get to the board unless there are issues. There
really could do with being a little more 'cost' to being a podling, or a
mentor for
Discussions on Ross' and Chris' proposals ground to a halt.
In my view, there are real issues that drove those discussions, even if
those discussions drove some of us to distraction.
A bit before the wiki crashed, I wrote:
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/BensonApril2013ProcessProposals
The TL;
59 matches
Mail list logo
