On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 4:50 AM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 7:46 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> > wrote: >>... > >> I'm starting to wonder whether the real solution here should be along the >> lines >> of what a board would do to a TLP if its active PMC shrinks to less >> than 3 people. >> > > Oh, that's easy, and has been done quite a few times. The Board moves them > to the Attic. ... The Board will give the PMC several chances, and this can > drag out for a year, but at the end of the day, the Board says "enough" and > forces the issue. Done. Attic'd.
That's what I was implying. > Now, I'm not sure if you were trying to draw an analogy between Board/PMC > and IPMC/PPMC. From a legal/oversight perspective, these are very > different. I don't think the IPMC should be so drastic. But the Board must, > and will. I honestly think its time for us to consider being more board like around here at IPMC. May be not exactly as strict as the board, but moving in that direction. After all, being a podling means being TLP-on-training-wheels. That's the whole idea. If your PMC shrinks -- you have to know what it means. Same here. If your mentors are not active -- you've got to raise hell around here on general@ before its too late. Thanks, Roman. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
