On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote: > Perhaps there are one or two good ideas in the proposals, but change does > not need to be as jarring.
I hope that the Incubator can make the best of those opportunities. > For example the IPMC ought to confirm with > mentors if they are still being a mentor to a particular podling. There can > be many reasons why not and we just need to ask. It could be that the > podling never achieved a visible development community. It's possible to automate pinging Mentors who didn't sign off on podling reports. A Python script could parse the last Incubator report (plus others going back N months if we want richer historical info), then send one email per podling to the podling's private list, CC'd to private@incubator. The script could be run by the Report Manager or the Chair each month after the report is filed. > Statements like shepherds dilute mentor responsibility are false. A shepherd > provides a mechanism for the IPMC to review the Podling/Mentor relationship. > This is something the IPMC needs to do when voting to graduate a podling. We > should be ALL be doing shepherding work. I can see what Alan's getting at, though. Unless the podling is in trouble, the podling contributors ought to be writing the report. The people who are then best placed to give informed feedback on that report are the podling's Mentors. But instead, the people who provide commentary on the state of the podling community tend to be the shepherds, whose understanding is necessarily more superficial. Doesn't that seem strange? Marvin Humphrey --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
