Noel,
On 4/11/07, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Alex Karasulu wrote:
> William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> > ASF members -do- have additional insights from private forums, and the
> > ability to oversee most of the private forums at the ASF. This means
> > they can (and do) go back to
robert burrell donkin wrote:
> On 4/13/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Ted Husted wrote:
>> > On 4/12/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> mentors are elected to the IPMC by the proposal approval vote
>>
>> Elected by being nominated to the iPMC
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> how it works ATM is that a member posts a request and the chair acts:
> there's nothing automatic about it
There is no vote (unless someone wants to object), and the process was voted
upon by the PMC. The PMC Chair does have the clerical role, but that's not
the sa
On 4/13/07, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> members who wish to join the IPMC do so by the grace of the chair
> (they send a request to the list and then the chair acts)
No, it isn't grace of the chair. The Incubator PMC voted to adopt the
policy towar
On 4/13/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ted Husted wrote:
> On 4/12/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> mentors are elected to the IPMC by the proposal approval vote
Elected by being nominated to the iPMC through an iPMC member's nomination
of them (sam
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> members who wish to join the IPMC do so by the grace of the chair
> (they send a request to the list and then the chair acts)
No, it isn't grace of the chair. The Incubator PMC voted to adopt the
policy towards ASF Members. It isn't an act of the Chair at all.
> In principle, I would suggest that we grant IPMC karma to Members in
> the same way we grant karma to private lists.
The Incubator PMC formally voted long along to adopt the policy that ASF
Members are entitled to join the Incubator PMC upon request. Technically,
we left room for a vote if some
Ted Husted wrote:
> On 4/12/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> mentors are elected to the IPMC by the proposal approval vote
Elected by being nominated to the iPMC through an iPMC member's nomination
of them (same as everywhere).
>> members who wish to join the IPMC do so
On 4/12/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> but
> it presumes the Mentor == ASF Member (and all members may join the iPMC
> with a ping-ack). Veto to that interpretation - you were right... needs
> to be updated.
this is a new and radically different interpretation. changing
On 4/12/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* when necessary *
given some of the problems that have been percolating all the way to
general@, there are some problems in mentorships. The hammer is only
applicable to things that are not acceptable ever - backroom (offlist)
decisi
Leo Simons wrote:
> On Apr 10, 2007, at 7:46 PM, Craig L Russell wrote:
>
>> to actively lead in the discharge of their duties (listed above).
>
> I don't see that list. It's a confusing sentence to me. "Mentors work to
> make sure no mentoring is needed, i.e. make sure that the podling
> becomes
On Apr 10, 2007, at 7:46 PM, Craig L Russell wrote:
I'm confused.
I can imagine. I think everyone is confused. That's what you get when
you try and write these process descriptions so formally, since the
actual process is not as formal. The "A mentor is... a permanent
member of the [ASF]"
On Apr 10, 2007, at 8:33 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Bottom line, what is the *motivation* to have non-ASF-member
Mentorships?
We need all the help we can get.
There's many people that volunteer to fill this mentoring role. Most
of them do a good job. They may not always be Members. The
On 4/10/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Craig L Russell wrote:
> I'm confused. The Process Description [1] seems to be clear:
>
> The Mentor is automatically made a member of the Incubator PMC, and
> reports to both the PMC and the Sponsor about your overall health and
> suita
Ted Husted wrote:
> On 4/11/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Cast a binding vote in the project? Yes, of course. Mentorship is a
>> heavier
>> hammer than that, when necessary.
>
> As a three-time Mentor, I would venture that anyone who mentors with a
> hammer doesn't under
On 4/11/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Cast a binding vote in the project? Yes, of course. Mentorship is a heavier
hammer than that, when necessary.
As a three-time Mentor, I would venture that anyone who mentors with a
hammer doesn't understand the role :)
-Ted.
--
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Alex Karasulu wrote:
>
>> William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
>>> ASF members -do- have additional insights from private forums, and the
>>> ability to oversee most of the private forums at the ASF. This means
>>> they can (and do) go back to the archives to look back at how a
Alex Karasulu wrote:
> William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> > ASF members -do- have additional insights from private forums, and the
> > ability to oversee most of the private forums at the ASF. This means
> > they can (and do) go back to the archives to look back at how a specific
> > issue (people is
Ted Husted wrote:
> On 4/10/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Bottom line, what is the *motivation* to have non-ASF-member Mentorships?
>
> I've already stated mine. To me, it's self-evident that if a person is
> qualified to serve on the Incubator PMC, then that individual is
On 4/10/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Bottom line, what is the *motivation* to have non-ASF-member Mentorships?
I've already stated mine. To me, it's self-evident that if a person is
qualified to serve on the Incubator PMC, then that individual is
qualified to serve as a p
On 4/9/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
SNIP ...
ASF members -do- have additional insights from private forums, and the
ability to oversee most of the private forums at the ASF. This means
they can (and do) go back to the archives to look back at how a specific
issue (people
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Someone is nominated the iPMC as an active, involved contributor.
No one needs to be on the Incubator PMC because they are an active contributor.
They should be on the Incubator PMC because they care about Incubation, and
Mentoring one or more projects.
> Bottom
Ted Husted wrote:
> On 4/9/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> But there is nothing stopping individuals from becoming a contributor.
>> I guess my point is that mentorship isn't a privilege, and shouldn't be
>> viewed as a feather in one's cap. We need active mentors, not th
Craig L Russell wrote:
> I'm confused. The Process Description [1] seems to be clear:
>
> The Mentor is automatically made a member of the Incubator PMC, and
> reports to both the PMC and the Sponsor about your overall health and
> suitability for eventual inclusion within the Apache Community (or
I'm confused. The Process Description [1] seems to be clear:
The Mentor is automatically made a member of the Incubator PMC, and
reports to both the PMC and the Sponsor about your overall health and
suitability for eventual inclusion within the Apache Community (or
recommendation to termina
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Ted Husted wrote:
> > In most cases, the underlying issue would be timing. We accept
> > podlings and mentors year round. ASF Members we accept only
> > once or twice a year.
> I'd agree with you if I perceived Mentorship as a privilege.
That seems irrelevant to Ted
Ted Husted wrote:
> As I understand it, once the proposal is accepted, the Mentors listed
> on the proposal become IPMC members. Once the proposal is accepted,
> and the group becomes a podling, then, yes, all Mentors and IPMC
> Members.
The Mentors being listed is interesting, but we had better
On 4/9/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'd agree with you if I perceived Mentorship as a privilege. I don't,
I view it entirely as a responsibility to convey "What is Apache" to
an aspiring podling. I don't disagree that any of our iPMC members
(members of any PMC at the fou
Ted Husted wrote:
> On 4/9/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> If you can give me some counter examples of why non ASF member mentorship
>> is a positive thing, I'd certainly consider those.
>
> It seems inconsistent to me that we would say to someone, yes, you
> have earned suf
On 4/9/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If you can give me some counter examples of why non ASF member mentorship
is a positive thing, I'd certainly consider those.
It seems inconsistent to me that we would say to someone, yes, you
have earned sufficient merit to serve on the
Ted Husted wrote:
>
> As to a podling proposal, I would suggest that we expect all Mentors
> be ASF Members or IPMC Members. If someone would like to be a Mentor
> but is not already a ASF Member, we could always elect that person to
> the IPMC first, and then accept the proposal.
Keep in mind AS
On Monday 09 April 2007 21:03, Ted Husted wrote:
> I would suggest that the IPMC can vote anyone onto the PMC, just like
> any other ASF project.
Which is already the case.
> As to a podling proposal, I would suggest that we expect all Mentors
> be ASF Members or IPMC Members. If someone would li
As I understand it, once the proposal is accepted, the Mentors listed
on the proposal become IPMC members. Once the proposal is accepted,
and the group becomes a podling, then, yes, all Mentors and IPMC
Members.
But, in order to be listed on a proposal, AFAIK, a Mentor does not
need to be a pre-e
I see that I've already commented on this thread without replying. ;-) To
continue, a Mentor is a member of the Incubator PMC "who will guide the
Candidate through the Incubation Process." Key point being an Incubator PMC
Member. If I recall correctly, the reason for the "at least one" clause w
On 4/5/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
i've always assumed that every mentor needed to be a member but IMHO
we should really consider what the rule should be and then vote to
amend the policy appropriately.
At one time, there was only one mentor, and now there are three, an
On 4/5/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/5/07, Henning Schmiedehausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well,
>
> incubator policy is able to contradict itself on one and the same page:
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html
>
> [...]
> Acceptance By
On Friday 06 April 2007 12:26, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> > On Friday 06 April 2007 12:03, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> >> Mentors must be on the iPMC, most iPMC members are ASF members (very
> >> rare that it is otherwise,
> >
> > Yes, I have noticed that ;o)
> > But I
Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> On Friday 06 April 2007 12:03, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>> Mentors must be on the iPMC, most iPMC members are ASF members (very rare
>> that it is otherwise,
>
> Yes, I have noticed that ;o)
> But I am one such rare case, so I see the distinction, and since an ASF
> Mem
On Friday 06 April 2007 12:03, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Mentors must be on the iPMC, most iPMC members are ASF members (very rare
> that it is otherwise,
Yes, I have noticed that ;o)
But I am one such rare case, so I see the distinction, and since an ASF Member
has the right to be member of
Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> On Friday 06 April 2007 05:44, Jean T. Anderson wrote:
>> I had recalled this being discussed before [1] because Cayenne had a
>> mentor who was not a member.
>
> So we are talking about a couple of variants;
>
> 1. An ASF Member.
> 2. An IPMC member.
> 3. A PMC member
On Friday 06 April 2007 05:44, Jean T. Anderson wrote:
> I had recalled this being discussed before [1] because Cayenne had a
> mentor who was not a member.
So we are talking about a couple of variants;
1. An ASF Member.
2. An IPMC member.
3. A PMC member of the sponsoring PMC.
4. Any PMC mem
I had recalled this being discussed before [1] because Cayenne had a
mentor who was not a member.
"Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on Fri, 14 Jul 2006:
> Bruce Snyder wrote:
>
>> What do you mean fix the doc? Is it not the policy that mentors be
>> members? I've seen and been involved
On 4/5/07, Henning Schmiedehausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well,
incubator policy is able to contradict itself on one and the same page:
http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html
[...]
Acceptance By Incubator
[...]
* the Mentors, nominated by the Sponsor, who will guide t
On Apr 5, 2007, at 10:53 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:
Well,
incubator policy is able to contradict itself on one and the same
page:
FWIW, the two statements aren't contradictory. "At least one"
doesn't imply "not all." The second requirement is simply a
strengtheni
Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:
Well,
incubator policy is able to contradict itself on one and the same page:
FWIW, the two statements aren't contradictory. "At least one"
doesn't imply "not all." The second requirement is simply a
strengthening of the first one ;-)
I do agree that the text cou
45 matches
Mail list logo
