Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
Part of how best to handle this is to remind people, when they're complaining, to keep two things in mind: a) only state the behavior you observed/read/witnessed, and be specific, rather than using generalizations such as "always", or "never." b) Keep to "I" statements. As silly as the template may be: I __ when you _, because ___. (and variants thereof). As in: "I felt like our podling was ignored by one of our mentors, because he only voted for one of the seven releases that we did." -- or -- "I got frustrated whenever I had to send an email to "general", because it usually generated a long email thread, and only one or two responses directly addressed my problem." Doing the above will do much to reduce possible contention. Perhaps add the above to the "what to expect" introduction to the incubator? Eric. On 6/21/13 5:52 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 2:18 AM, Upayavira wrote: As in any such survey, author identity should be optional. Sometimes it can be deduced, but not always, and if someone would rather not mention their name, we should give them that opportunity. "Sometimes" preserving anonymity is not good enough. It would be irresponsible of us to solicit candid feedback when identity will be revealed "sometimes". If respondents state that they would prefer to remain anonymous, at the very least we must limit publication of any natural language responses to private@incubator -- which would be unfortunate because it shunts discussion that ought to take place in public onto a private list. Furthermore, we should tell them outright that they are fooling themselves if they think no IPMC members will be able to guess who they are. I'm not even sure we can realistically preserve anonymity for "scale of 1 to 10", multiple choice, true/false and so on given the very limited pool of potential respondents. We're going to have to think really hard about what we ask and what we publish -- and if we try hard to scrub and fail, I'm going to feel really bad. Nevertheless, if an "anonymous" option that can only be discussed privately is the price of consensus, I'm still on board. It's better than nothing. Marvin Humphrey - 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
Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
On 6/21/13 5:58 AM, "Upayavira" wrote: > > >On Fri, Jun 21, 2013, at 01:52 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 2:18 AM, Upayavira wrote: >> >> > As in any such survey, author identity should be optional. Sometimes >>it >> > can be deduced, but not always, and if someone would rather not >>mention >> > their name, we should give them that opportunity. >> >> "Sometimes" preserving anonymity is not good enough. It would be >> irresponsible of us to solicit candid feedback when identity will be >> revealed >> "sometimes". >> >> If respondents state that they would prefer to remain anonymous, at the >> very >> least we must limit publication of any natural language responses to >> private@incubator -- which would be unfortunate because it shunts >> discussion >> that ought to take place in public onto a private list. Furthermore, we >> should tell them outright that they are fooling themselves if they think >> no >> IPMC members will be able to guess who they are. >> >> I'm not even sure we can realistically preserve anonymity for "scale of >>1 >> to >> 10", multiple choice, true/false and so on given the very limited pool >>of >> potential respondents. We're going to have to think really hard about >> what we >> ask and what we publish -- and if we try hard to scrub and fail, I'm >> going to >> feel really bad. >> >> Nevertheless, if an "anonymous" option that can only be discussed >> privately is >> the price of consensus, I'm still on board. It's better than nothing. > >Exactly. I've seen many surveys where the name is optional, but 5 of 6 >people fill in their name. So much for anonymity. > >I would say make the name field optional and have a 'keep my comments >private' tickbox, default unticked. They likely won't be able to keep it >from any members of the IPMC, but at least would allow them to say "you >are a complete bunch of loosers" without it getting into the public >domain. As a newbie, it seemed like the IPMC and ASF as a whole was like how the movies portray the Mafia in the sense that you had to earn your way in, and folks were pretty tight-knit and knew each other personally. There is no way I would name any names in any email where I didn't know exactly who would read it, so I would never name names in a survey or in an email to an ombudsman or private@. Not because of fear that a 'hit' would be put on me, but just that it could burn bridges I might need later. That's why I just offered another section to the "What to expect" thread about finding a mentor or ASF member to work with to resolve complaints against individuals. If the matter cannot be resolved directly and off-list, that mentor or ASF member should help the crafting of any email that ends up on-list. Just because the person you are complaining about isn't in the IPMC, there is no guarantee they won't be invited to join the day after you write your email to private@. I would actually suggest giving up on trying to find a way to provide anonymity and adding a warning to the survey/exit-interview to caution folks about naming names. In theory, the complaints about individuals you are worrying about missing have been alluded to on the dev list of that project and addressed via the help of mentors or other ASF members long before the project graduates and an exit interview happens. If some person filling out the exit interview has something else to say that requires they remain anonymous, they should also voice that with a mentor or ASF member, and they should have done so long before graduation as well back when the incident or issue was taking place. My five cents, -Alex - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013, at 01:52 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: > On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 2:18 AM, Upayavira wrote: > > > As in any such survey, author identity should be optional. Sometimes it > > can be deduced, but not always, and if someone would rather not mention > > their name, we should give them that opportunity. > > "Sometimes" preserving anonymity is not good enough. It would be > irresponsible of us to solicit candid feedback when identity will be > revealed > "sometimes". > > If respondents state that they would prefer to remain anonymous, at the > very > least we must limit publication of any natural language responses to > private@incubator -- which would be unfortunate because it shunts > discussion > that ought to take place in public onto a private list. Furthermore, we > should tell them outright that they are fooling themselves if they think > no > IPMC members will be able to guess who they are. > > I'm not even sure we can realistically preserve anonymity for "scale of 1 > to > 10", multiple choice, true/false and so on given the very limited pool of > potential respondents. We're going to have to think really hard about > what we > ask and what we publish -- and if we try hard to scrub and fail, I'm > going to > feel really bad. > > Nevertheless, if an "anonymous" option that can only be discussed > privately is > the price of consensus, I'm still on board. It's better than nothing. Exactly. I've seen many surveys where the name is optional, but 5 of 6 people fill in their name. So much for anonymity. I would say make the name field optional and have a 'keep my comments private' tickbox, default unticked. They likely won't be able to keep it from any members of the IPMC, but at least would allow them to say "you are a complete bunch of loosers" without it getting into the public domain. Upayavira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 2:18 AM, Upayavira wrote: > As in any such survey, author identity should be optional. Sometimes it > can be deduced, but not always, and if someone would rather not mention > their name, we should give them that opportunity. "Sometimes" preserving anonymity is not good enough. It would be irresponsible of us to solicit candid feedback when identity will be revealed "sometimes". If respondents state that they would prefer to remain anonymous, at the very least we must limit publication of any natural language responses to private@incubator -- which would be unfortunate because it shunts discussion that ought to take place in public onto a private list. Furthermore, we should tell them outright that they are fooling themselves if they think no IPMC members will be able to guess who they are. I'm not even sure we can realistically preserve anonymity for "scale of 1 to 10", multiple choice, true/false and so on given the very limited pool of potential respondents. We're going to have to think really hard about what we ask and what we publish -- and if we try hard to scrub and fail, I'm going to feel really bad. Nevertheless, if an "anonymous" option that can only be discussed privately is the price of consensus, I'm still on board. It's better than nothing. Marvin Humphrey - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
[DRAFT] Apache Flex Podling Exit Interview (if there was such a thing) (was Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews)
First, a disclaimer. This is just my personal take on things and no one else on the Apache Flex PMC was involved in writing this. As the PMC chair of a relatively recently graduated podling, I would like to suggest that if you choose to implement "exit interviews" they should probably be optional, and I would argue that they should be requested at least 3 months after graduation, after the transition from podling to project is hopefully complete. First, there are potential nightmares in the transition, and second, after that dust settles, there is hopefully time to reflect. Regarding anonymity, I would suggest that any naming of names should happen outside the interview and on private@. Anyway, the exit interview for Apache Flex would be short. It would say: "We started with four mentors, one dropped out, the other three were great, two remain on the project PMC. When you have enough active mentors, the Incubator works just fine. Yes, documentation could be better, but we figured it out and graduated and are off an running as a TLP." Now if the interview contained an open comments section, I would say the following: I've been scanning what must be hundreds of emails in at least 3 threads trying to fix the Incubator. Personally, I think the Incubator is working as well as should be expected. Can it be better? Maybe. Because I think there really is only one "problem", and that is simply "time". In fact, "time" is the root cause of all "problems" at Apache, especially at the other main source, which is Infra, and it amazes me that it doesn't really get mentioned explicitly in these discussions. To me, it is par for the course when you have a group of volunteers running things. I haven't done much volunteering, but are there other organizations as large as Apache that is administered by volunteers? Big charities seem to have paid administrators. Infra has some paid folks, and I haven't checked Apache history, but I would imagine Infra was once all-volunteer until it was decided it was not going to scale and donation money was diverted to fund fully-dedicated people to it. And still, they are underfunded as lots of minor requests slip through the cracks. It may simply be time to try to get more donation money diverted to pay one or two folks to serve on the IPMC. You can try every new idea you want, but they will all fail if folks simply don't have the time and energy to execute them. -Alex - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
Anomnity of the individual not the project. I can say "my mentor was crap" without stating my name - I could be any one of the PPMC. Upayavira On Thu, Jun 20, 2013, at 10:32 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 10:18:16AM +0100, Upayavira wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 20, 2013, at 03:54 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: > > > On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Alan Cabrera > > > wrote: > > > > Solution: require all podlings to submit anonymous exit interviews as > > > > part > > > > of the graduation requirements. These exit interviews will be suitably > > > > scrubbed and organized by the Incubator Ombudsman; see next proposal. > > > > > > A few sample questions: > > > > > > * What aspect of incubation benefitted your podling the most? > > > * What advice would you give to future podlings? > > > * What was the most useful thing you learned? > > > * What could we have done differently? > > > > > > I think we should accept the survey in private but publish the results on > > > general@ after scrubbing sections marked and anything else > > > sensitive > > > at the ombud's discretion. Author identity should be preserved, because > > > any > > > attempt at anonymization will be dangerously futile. > > > > As in any such survey, author identity should be optional. Sometimes it > > can be deduced, but not always, and if someone would rather not mention > > their name, we should give them that opportunity. > > Only one podling graduated in the last two months. At this rate, if you > really > want anonymity, you'll have to publish the results once per quarter at > most. > > - > 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
Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 10:18:16AM +0100, Upayavira wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 20, 2013, at 03:54 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Alan Cabrera > > wrote: > > > Solution: require all podlings to submit anonymous exit interviews as part > > > of the graduation requirements. These exit interviews will be suitably > > > scrubbed and organized by the Incubator Ombudsman; see next proposal. > > > > A few sample questions: > > > > * What aspect of incubation benefitted your podling the most? > > * What advice would you give to future podlings? > > * What was the most useful thing you learned? > > * What could we have done differently? > > > > I think we should accept the survey in private but publish the results on > > general@ after scrubbing sections marked and anything else > > sensitive > > at the ombud's discretion. Author identity should be preserved, because > > any > > attempt at anonymization will be dangerously futile. > > As in any such survey, author identity should be optional. Sometimes it > can be deduced, but not always, and if someone would rather not mention > their name, we should give them that opportunity. Only one podling graduated in the last two months. At this rate, if you really want anonymity, you'll have to publish the results once per quarter at most. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013, at 03:54 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: > On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Alan Cabrera > wrote: > > Solution: require all podlings to submit anonymous exit interviews as part > > of the graduation requirements. These exit interviews will be suitably > > scrubbed and organized by the Incubator Ombudsman; see next proposal. > > A few sample questions: > > * What aspect of incubation benefitted your podling the most? > * What advice would you give to future podlings? > * What was the most useful thing you learned? > * What could we have done differently? > > I think we should accept the survey in private but publish the results on > general@ after scrubbing sections marked and anything else > sensitive > at the ombud's discretion. Author identity should be preserved, because > any > attempt at anonymization will be dangerously futile. As in any such survey, author identity should be optional. Sometimes it can be deduced, but not always, and if someone would rather not mention their name, we should give them that opportunity. Upayavira - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Alan Cabrera wrote: > Solution: require all podlings to submit anonymous exit interviews as part > of the graduation requirements. These exit interviews will be suitably > scrubbed and organized by the Incubator Ombudsman; see next proposal. A few sample questions: * What aspect of incubation benefitted your podling the most? * What advice would you give to future podlings? * What was the most useful thing you learned? * What could we have done differently? I think we should accept the survey in private but publish the results on general@ after scrubbing sections marked and anything else sensitive at the ombud's discretion. Author identity should be preserved, because any attempt at anonymization will be dangerously futile. Marvin Humphrey - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013, at 12:18 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: > I'm not keen on this one. I don't like surveys and I don't like mandatory > activities for volunteers. Yet, Apache does have mandatory reporting for podlings and TLPs. It's not like this is particularly onerous. (Note, I read the proposal as an exit interview for the project/podling, not each and every individual committer/PPMC member.) But if the "mandatory" thing is too much for people, I think "strongly encouraged" exit interviews are a good idea. I am curious how the reports would be scrubbed, though - given that the timing of an exit interview would strongly indicate which project had graduated, and there's usually a fairly small number of mentors and project participants to provide feedback. 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
Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
I believe a set of automatically generated monthly metrics including a number of commits, total number of letters to the project mail list and number of mentor letters to the list will give a good picture which projects experience which problems. 15.06.2013 19:48 пользователь "Alan Cabrera" написал: > > Problem: we seem to have unclear and conflicting ideas as to what the > areas of improvement are for the Incubator. > > Cause: we have no concrete, anonymized, information on what the podlings' > experiences were during incubation. > > Solution: require all podlings to submit anonymous exit interviews as part > of the graduation requirements. These exit interviews will be suitably > scrubbed and organized by the Incubator Ombudsman; see next proposal. > > > Regards, > Alan > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
+1, I'm with Ross. I'm not keen on mandatory anything but the minimal necessity to keep the ship and the foundation rolling. However, knowing Alan, maybe the tools will simply be set up and available to those that want to use them. Joe put as much in his start at the Bill of Rights. Cheers, Chris ++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++ -Original Message- From: Ross Gardler Reply-To: "general@incubator.apache.org" Date: Saturday, June 15, 2013 10:18 AM To: general Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews >I'm not keen on this one. I don't like surveys and I don't like mandatory >activities for volunteers. > >However, a pro-active invitation to feedback on experiences at any time >during incubation or shortly after would be good. Even better would be >recruiting more valuable people from podlings as mentors. > >Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity >On 15 Jun 2013 16:48, "Alan Cabrera" wrote: > >> >> Problem: we seem to have unclear and conflicting ideas as to what the >> areas of improvement are for the Incubator. >> >> Cause: we have no concrete, anonymized, information on what the >>podlings' >> experiences were during incubation. >> >> Solution: require all podlings to submit anonymous exit interviews as >>part >> of the graduation requirements. These exit interviews will be suitably >> scrubbed and organized by the Incubator Ombudsman; see next proposal. >> >> >> Regards, >> Alan >> >> >> - >> 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
Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
Agreed on the undesirability of making survey participation mandatory. On the wiki page in question I framed it as a right that surveys are available fwiw. Sent from my iPhone On Jun 15, 2013, at 1:18 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: > I'm not keen on this one. I don't like surveys and I don't like mandatory > activities for volunteers. > > However, a pro-active invitation to feedback on experiences at any time > during incubation or shortly after would be good. Even better would be > recruiting more valuable people from podlings as mentors. > > Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity > On 15 Jun 2013 16:48, "Alan Cabrera" wrote: > >> >> Problem: we seem to have unclear and conflicting ideas as to what the >> areas of improvement are for the Incubator. >> >> Cause: we have no concrete, anonymized, information on what the podlings' >> experiences were during incubation. >> >> Solution: require all podlings to submit anonymous exit interviews as part >> of the graduation requirements. These exit interviews will be suitably >> scrubbed and organized by the Incubator Ombudsman; see next proposal. >> >> >> Regards, >> Alan >> >> >> - >> 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
Re: [PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
I'm not keen on this one. I don't like surveys and I don't like mandatory activities for volunteers. However, a pro-active invitation to feedback on experiences at any time during incubation or shortly after would be good. Even better would be recruiting more valuable people from podlings as mentors. Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity On 15 Jun 2013 16:48, "Alan Cabrera" wrote: > > Problem: we seem to have unclear and conflicting ideas as to what the > areas of improvement are for the Incubator. > > Cause: we have no concrete, anonymized, information on what the podlings' > experiences were during incubation. > > Solution: require all podlings to submit anonymous exit interviews as part > of the graduation requirements. These exit interviews will be suitably > scrubbed and organized by the Incubator Ombudsman; see next proposal. > > > Regards, > Alan > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
[PROPOSAL] Mandatory podling exit interviews
Problem: we seem to have unclear and conflicting ideas as to what the areas of improvement are for the Incubator. Cause: we have no concrete, anonymized, information on what the podlings' experiences were during incubation. Solution: require all podlings to submit anonymous exit interviews as part of the graduation requirements. These exit interviews will be suitably scrubbed and organized by the Incubator Ombudsman; see next proposal. Regards, Alan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
