On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote:

> Chris,
>
> What I was trying to do with this particular thread is to identify the
> problems the incubator has before deciding on solutions. If we can get a
> common agreement on that, specific solutions will be much easier for us
> all to accept.
>
> So, my question to you is are you able/willing to articulate the
> problems do you see the incubator as having, that need to be solved?
> That is, without (yet) suggesting how it should be fixed?
>
> I'd be very curious to hear how you see it.
>
> Upayavira
>
>
This is what i think is a big part of the problem:

The PMC is so big and diverse, and made up of people who just join by
choice not by being invited, and sometimes they don't even care about the
PMC they just join to mentor their poddling, so there isn't so much sense
of respect or working together. Those people all have different points of
view and expectations on how things should happen, some are liberal while
some are more conservative, and the set of people who are active varies
over time.

So what that means is it can be hard to tell what the reaction will be to
any particular action, and when something unexpected happens its
understandable that sometimes someone is going to get surprised or upset.

Take voting on a release as an example, sometimes that will get three quick
+1s with minimal review, sometimes it will take weeks of pleading for
votes, sometimes a problem will be pointed out but people will still vote
+1 anyway, sometimes it will be +1'd with a request to fix the issue later,
other times it will be demanded that a respin is done to fix the issue.
Theres no way of knowing really, it just depends who happens to be around
and active at the time.

And the same thing happens for just about every situation where there is
some rule or policy or guideline documented.

There are things I think we could do to fix some of that, but i agree with
Upayavira, we would need some common understanding and agreement on what
the issues are first.

   ...ant

Reply via email to