On 2/2/2012 12:27 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: > > I guess the key difference between this small (but important) part of > our interpretation of this Incubator fix resolution that we're discussing > is the following: > > You (and maybe Greg?) feel that you need 1 VP guy (and perhaps > a committee/or not) to help out these projects-from-day-1-new-projects > that will be coming into the ASF, and that you need information flow up > from that guy and responsibility/culpability from that guy to the board, > and on down from it.
Nope, that VP would not be a flow-through. Not even visible when things are working optimally; > I, on the other hand, feel that the N(=3?) ASF members that have to be > part of the new project's PMC from day 1, and that that new project's > VP (from day 1), are sufficient to provide that information flow up, and > responsibility/culpability. And guidance. And pointers to ASF resources > like ComDev (which will hold the Incubator docs), like Legal, like etc. > Just like the way it works today on our projects. Exactly. When those N(>=3) mentors don't have it together, this VP can step in to facilitate. Those mentors have to follow this VP's documented process flow established to expedite things for the board's benefit. When (not if) the process changes and evolves, it's on this VP to make the necessary modifications. But that VP won't be a gating factor if the mentors are experienced with the process. Responsibility for incubating projects is /not/ on the VP. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
