Hi Dave,
-----Original Message----- From: Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> Reply-To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org> Date: Thursday, March 28, 2013 3:38 PM To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org> Subject: Re: Vote on personal matters: majority vote vs consensus > >On Mar 28, 2013, at 9:19 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: > >> Hey Ross, >> >> >>>>> I disagree. Chris' proposal removes the IPMC thus making the board >>> legally >>>>> responsible for everything that committee does today. Yes it replaces >>>> it >>>>> with an oversight body, but how does that scale? >>>> >>>> Please let me respectfully disagree with your interpretation of my >>>> Incubator >>>> deconstruction proposal [1]. In fact, it does not make the board >>>>legally >>>> responsible >>>> in any different way than the board is currently responsible for its >>>> plethora of >>>> TLPs -- IOW, it doesn't change a thing. It basically suggests that >>>> incoming projects >>>> can simply fast track to (t)LPs from the get go, so long as they have >>>>> = 3 >>>> ASF members >>>> present to help execute and manage the Incubator "process" which still >>>> exists in >>>> my proposed deconstruction. >>> >>> My point is that all the oversight currently provided by the IPMC would >>> have to be provided by the board. We already know that having three >>> mentors >>> does not guarantee adequate support for podlings. >> >> I guess I would ask "what oversight"? There is no global IPMC oversight. >> Ever since Joe's experiment, and even before, the podlings that get >>through >> the Incubator (and I've taken quite a few now, and recently, so I think >>I >> can speak from a position of experience here within the last few years), >> are the ones that have active mentors and *distributed*, not >>*centralized* >> oversight. >> >> IOW, I'm not seeing any IPMC oversight at the moment. I'm seeing good >> mentors, >> located in each podling, distributed, that get podlings through. Those >>that >> stall well they need help. Usually the help is debated endlessly, and >>not >> solved, >> or simply solved with more active/better mentors. > >My experience as a shepherd shows that you can in fact recognize podling >issues and eventually get them to the point where graduation of one kind >or another happens. Two examples: > >EasyAnt graduating to Apache Ant. > >Etch finally graduated with a small, but sufficient PMC. I wasn't stating that you can't do this :) In fact, you are precisely the example of what I'm talking about when I say, 'good' mentors. You actively volunteered for a new system created by Jukka, to care about other podlings and sign off on their reports, and monitor them. Awesome sauce. Great job. OTOH, I've *never* volunteered to be a shepherd, b/c honestly I think it's an additional name/responsibility that's fairly meaningless. I've been signing off on other podling reports that I see for years. As have other mentors, Joe S used to do that -- Ant and Alex and others have done that too. Even before there was a name, 'shepherd' for this. > >> So, that's my whole point. You either agree with me that there is no >>IPMC >> oversight at the moment (for years now), and that really podlings are >>TLPs >> (well the ones that graduate within a fixed set of time as Sam was >>trying >> to measure >> before, or simply point out that is) or you still believe that there is >> oversight >> within the IPMC. > >I don't think it is an either / or. The current amount of oversight for >any podling is a function of mentors, current IPMC dynamics, and real >life influences. > >The shepherds serve a purpose as more of a divining rod into that >dynamic, many solutions are possible, and the podling needs to be pushed >into making choices. Sure, I agree with that. And rather than generically stating there are choices, and we have many to choose amongst, I've actually written my thoughts down about a choice, a series of observations, a proposed solution and deconstruction of the Incubator. Cheers, Chris > >Regards, >Dave > >> I personally don't. That's why I wrote the proposal. And >> I think >> that's at least evident to me and more than a few others that that's the >> problem here >> and that's why I don't think the Incubator should exist anymore in its >> current form >> and should be deconstructed :) >> >> Thanks for your comments and conversation and for listening. >> >> Cheers, >> Chris >> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. >> Senior Computer Scientist >> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA >> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 >> Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov >> WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department >> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> >> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
