The question of a time limit is like other questions we deal with: we don't want to set a hard limit, but the idea of incubation going along for years and years is not consistent with the vision of what the incubator is. Sam was at pains to present this dilemma, not to ask for some kind of hard limit.
Ross, I can now see how your 'follow the mentors' model should have the effect of solving this problem, too. I didn't start this thread with 'we have a broken process,' I started it with, 'I want to clarify what our process is.' To me, this discussion feeds my prior belief that we need to continue to emphasize the importance of active, engaged, mentors, and see their absence in a podling as a problem that demands attention. There are people here (notable Greg) who are very skeptical of this mentor-centric model. However, it seems to me that the consensus of the community continues to be to try to tune/repair it, not replace it. On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 9:41 AM, ant elder <ant.el...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 2:32 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacre...@apache.org >> wrote: > >> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 3:24 PM, ant elder <ant.el...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > ...Slow poddlings don't use much ASF resource so aren't a burden... >> >> I disagree: podlings do use mentor's energy - graduating or retiring >> them is a way to free up mentors for other incoming podlings. >> > > I did say "If there are willing participants" which includes the mentors. > > And I don't think looking at mentors as a pot of resource is the correct > view. > > ...ant --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
