On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Joe Brockmeier <j...@zonker.net> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015, at 10:27 AM, Joe Schaefer wrote: > > Joe, has any of this conversation put your mind at ease about the > > podling? > > I'm less concerned than I was, yes. I'm still not in +1 territory. I'm > not entirely sure I'm out of -1 territory. > > Sentry has made progress in its time in the incubator, but I feel it's > required a lot of prodding at each step of the way - to reporting on > time, adding contributors*, making sure its incubation status page is > filled out, etc. It's also had some problems with release process, but I > don't hold that against any podling because our release process can be > hard to get right. > > I would like to respectfully disagree here. As far as I can see all 7 committers for added organically. Without any prodding. > But I view the podling as one that's concerned with releasing software, > not growing community. I keep seeing references to "actively preventing" > contributions - but I don't think that's a very high bar to clear. I > want to see a podling actively working to make it possible to join and > contribute. > > I'll note that I may see Sentry differently because I am a > non-developer. The Jira-focused process may be adequate for folks who > are primarily only focused on the release of software. It is not a > particularly inviting or transparent process to anybody who might like > to participate in Sentry in non-development roles. And I hope we care > about contributors who will add value to Apache projects in > non-development roles (documentation, marketing, translation, etc.). > > At any rate - I've said my piece, and I'll just reiterate that I don't > think additional time is the answer. The signal I get from Sentry is > that the podling feels it's ready to graduate, and they've indicated > that they don't feel my suggestions are a "valid ask" - so I don't see > much value in holding back a DISCUSSION and VOTE. > > Note, as I understand it the board "is unlikely" to approve a podling > where a mentor is voting -1. While I have concerns, I also don't want to > filibuster the process and just keep Sentry in Limbo. I'd appreciate > input from other IPMC folks on best decorum (e.g. abstaining from the > vote, stepping down as mentor) in this situation. If other folks share > my concerns, the vote wouldn't pass. If I'm wrong, I don't feel I should > hold it up single-handedly. > > * I would invite folks with access to go to Sentry's private list and > look over discussions about adding new contributors, and discussions > about the project in general. > > Best, > > jzb > -- > Joe Brockmeier > j...@zonker.net > Twitter: @jzb > http://www.dissociatedpress.net/ > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > -- Sravya Tirukkovalur
