On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 7:19 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > For me, I consider being a mentor as I do being a member of a PMC. > Occasionally one simply lacks cycles to be actively involved, but > one is involve enough to see that others *ARE* involved, and so I > am "unconcerned" about my inactivity during those times. > > My understanding is that this is OK and its one of the reasons > why we *have* multiple mentors.
Agreed. > "Shaming" inactive mentors would be akin to "shaming" PMC members who > didn't post on the dev@ list this month, or who didn't vote on a release > or etc... I do not advocate shaming. I do advocate (1) making changes to policy based on actual data, and (2) using that data to have personal discussions. What spawned this period of introspection was a proposal made elsewhere that to me seemed like the essence of truthiness[1]. I would like to replace that, wherever possible, with actual data; however uncomfortable that might be. I encourage those that gather such data to be sensitive when using that data. In particular, Ted's noting that I haven't been a visibly active mentor for odftoolkit is probably something that should have been done privately. It worked out fine with me, but it might not with others. > I am not, of course, referring to mentors who are truly MIA month in and > month out. But, as someone said, if you remove those from the equation, > the list of "active" mentors is pretty constant. I think it would be helpful if we had an accurate picture of mentorship. This will help with things like evaluating graduation resolutions. > So the question is "Is there a difference or problem between a podling > with 10 mentors, of which 4 are 'active', as compared to a podling with > 4 mentors, all of which are 'active'"?? I know many mentors personally. Knowing which podlings you (Jim) are on top of makes me comfortable that I can focus elsewhere. Having me as a mentor of record on a podling that I am not focusing on may be misleading. - Sam Ruby [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthiness >> On Oct 13, 2015, at 2:29 AM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 11:05 PM, Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote: >> >>>> Sounds like reaching out to the inactive mentors is a great idea and I >>>> think we have a great example here of how complicated it can be. >>> >>> Nope. I posted that link knowing that my name would be on it, and >>> advocated that we should be having exactly this discussion. I should >>> either become more active on this, or (and probably more likely) >>> remove myself as a mentor for this podling. >> >> >> And possibly by so doing become a great example to others of us who can't >> admit to ourselves that we are over-extended. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
