Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

> On Aug 14, 2019, at 3:59 AM, Greg Stein wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 12, 2019, 22:31 David Nalley wrote: >> ... > >> Greg - I propose that you, Ross (sorry for volunteering you), and I >> pick an incubating project in need of mentor attention and make this >> as streamlined as we can. Let's

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

FTR: I think the biggest risk to the foundation are not these procedural aspects, like releases, but the gradual but inexorable decline in our culture and our principles. That is, or at least should be, the bigger concern. And I think the Incubator should take that risk much more seriously and

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 9:47 PM Justin Mclean wrote: > > Hi > > Thanks for the idea and offer of help. > > > 1) Concurrent with the start of a release vote by a PPMC, the IPMC is > > to be notified that that vote is happening. IPMC members are > > encouraged to participate in the vote process on

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

> On Aug 14, 2019, at 1:24 AM, Dave Fisher wrote: > >>> >>> Q: Does the IPMC want to produce non-ASF releases? > > My answer is yes! I want podlings to be on a path towards graduation! I > recognize multiple requirements. The path may differ for each podling. I’m > the end there are two

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

Hi, > That Infra and the board will allow a podling to put packages containing the > WIP-disclaimer on dist.a.o as long as those packages Infra have already confirmed that’s OK, legal have said it OK with some conditions, including if incubator releases are considered special. There is a

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

Hi Thanks for the idea and offer of help. > 1) Concurrent with the start of a release vote by a PPMC, the IPMC is > to be notified that that vote is happening. IPMC members are > encouraged to participate in the vote process on the PPMC list where > it is happening. This has been discussed

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

IMO, the key change as already been made: There is now a WIP-disclaimer. AFAICT, the rest of this thread has been an attempt to create an objective process around a subjective topic (in this case risk). The better use of time may be to just launch an experiment by making the one change

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 1:24 AM Justin Mclean wrote: > > Hi, > > >> This is because of ASF bylaws i.e only PMC votes are binding on releases. > > > > That is not in the Bylaws. Stop making stuff up. > > That the way it’s been explained to me, several times, by experienced ASF > people, that only

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

Hi, I’m not referring to a recent thing, I’m referring to in part to this [1]. I suggest you read what Mark wrote there, but even before this JIRA many Apache podlings have made non-offical releases for a number of reasons some in line with policy (and some not). I can point you to one

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

On Wed, Aug 14, 2019, 06:00 Julian Feinauer wrote: > Hi Greg, > > I think Justins Answer refers to the WIP-Disclaimer Aware of that, but disagree. It is way more: the IPMC vote is performed to establish legal oversight and shield. I suggest that is burdensome and should be tossed. PS.: Allow

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

Hi Greg, I think Justins Answer refers to the WIP-Disclaimer which was recently added to the incubator Policy Page: https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#disclaimers A Podlings releasing with the WIP Disclaimer is no ASF release, so I consider Justins response is no misdirection

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

On Mon, Aug 12, 2019, 22:31 David Nalley wrote: >... > Greg - I propose that you, Ross (sorry for volunteering you), and I > pick an incubating project in need of mentor attention and make this > as streamlined as we can. Let's focus on educating and enabling and > not gatekeeping. Let's prove

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

On Wed, Aug 14, 2019, 00:33 Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > > Q: Does the IPMC want to produce non-ASF releases? > > A: We already are Not true, as you well know. Whether we call the above a lie, or misdirection is left to the reader. The IPMC currently attempts to ensure all podling releases

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

Hi, > Q: Does the IPMC want to produce non-ASF releases? A: We already are, but there are some constraints around what to calling them, branding and when they can be placed. (And these are not IPMC policies.) Thanks, Justin -

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

Hi, >> This is because of ASF bylaws i.e only PMC votes are binding on releases. > > That is not in the Bylaws. Stop making stuff up. That the way it’s been explained to me, several times, by experienced ASF people, that only PMC votes are binding on releases and podlings are not mentioned in

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

>> >> Q: Does the IPMC want to produce non-ASF releases? My answer is yes! I want podlings to be on a path towards graduation! I recognize multiple requirements. The path may differ for each podling. I’m the end there are two outcomes! Thanks Greg! Regards, Dave >> >> -g > > >

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

Sent from my iPhone > On Aug 13, 2019, at 9:32 PM, Greg Stein wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 8:17 PM Justin Mclean > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >>> Hoops constructed by the IPMC. Like a secondary release vote on general@ >> >> This is because of ASF bylaws i.e only PMC votes are binding on

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 8:17 PM Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > > Hoops constructed by the IPMC. Like a secondary release vote on general@ > > This is because of ASF bylaws i.e only PMC votes are binding on releases. That is not in the Bylaws. Stop making stuff up. > So you're saying

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

Hi, As an aside for any project looking for mentors you can see what projects they mentor at teh bottom of this page: https://incubator.apache.org/clutch/ And you can also check if they have been signing off reports here (if you are an ASF member or IPMC member):

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

A vanity mentor is a person with a big name and a small amount of time. Projects go for the name, the mentor goes for the ego boost and then reality catches up. But, hey, you are "mentoring" 12 projects! On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 5:18 PM David Jencks wrote: > What’s a “vanity mentor“? How do I

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

Hi, > They are gated day by day by day. Empirically, we already know the podlings > dislike this. Empirically? I would say it’s more anecdotally, (and the anonymous podling survey has actually never brought this up as an issue), and “day by day by day” is an exaggeration. Other than the

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

Hi, > Hoops constructed by the IPMC. Like a secondary release vote on general@ This is because of ASF bylaws i.e only PMC votes are binding on releases. So you're saying implementations of ASF bylaws are "arbitrarily defined hoops”? There could be other ways of dealing with this bylaw that

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 7:10 PM Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > > Here's an idea... The IPMC focuses on supporting mentors to do their job > rather than forcing project developers and their mentors to jump through > arbitrarily defined hoops. > > What "arbitrarily defined hoops” are you referring

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

What’s a “vanity mentor“? How do I recognize one before a podling has a significant history? Who is currently accepting these vanity mentors and how would they stop doing so? Hindsight is 20-20... I have no crystal ball. David Jencks Sent from my iPhone > On Aug 13, 2019, at 5:10 PM, Justin

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

Hi, > Here's an idea... The IPMC focuses on supporting mentors to do their job > rather than forcing project developers and their mentors to jump through > arbitrarily defined hoops. What "arbitrarily defined hoops” are you referring to? ASF policy or something else? > The IPMC doesn't need

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

Here's an idea... The IPMC focuses on supporting mentors to do their job rather than forcing project developers and their mentors to jump through arbitrarily defined hoops. That means stay out of the way until the mentor asks for a graduation vote. The IPMC doesn't need to enforce policy of

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

Hi, > I am for option (F) with the addition of Myrle’s [REVIEW] until such time as > the podling is fully compliant with Apache Release Policy and goes through > the usual process. Abiding by the Apache Release Policy would remain a > Graduation Requirement. I’ll note not a single podling has

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

I see I was volunteer... OK let's do it. --- Sent from my phone, you know what that means - sorry From: David Nalley Sent: Monday, August 12, 2019 8:31:29 PM To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

When I used to do endless apache way talks I used to say "if you are using an Incubator project expect to invest in both engineering and legal, but once a project is a TLP your legal can reduce and engineering becomes about your use rather than community progrwe towards TLP" In other words Jim

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

Hi Ted, This subthread as named by Greg is really about this: > On Aug 11, 2019, at 5:56 PM, Greg Stein wrote: > > See further below for an unfortunately trimmed thread. A couple paragraphs > that I wrote early-thread are important to add: > > > Option (F): stop calling them official ASF

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

Dave, I understand the problem with long delays. What I don't understand is how the proposal changes any of that. 90% of project release still require additional votes. How will that change? Every other change is peripheral. On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 8:37 AM Dave Fisher wrote: > > > > On Aug

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

> On Aug 12, 2019, at 1:34 PM, Ted Dunning wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 11:10 AM Dave Fisher > wrote: > >> >> >>> On Aug 12, 2019, at 10:02 AM, Ted Dunning wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 9:24 AM Jim Jagielski wrote: >>> > On Aug 12,

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

> > I'd like to see the IPMC get out of the way of the podlings' releases. I > see no reason for us to be a gate, and many more reasons to back off and > let podlings get their work done. > I strongly agree with your sentiment, even if I differ with your tactics a bit. I think that they are

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 11:10 AM Dave Fisher wrote: > > > > On Aug 12, 2019, at 10:02 AM, Ted Dunning wrote: > > > > On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 9:24 AM Jim Jagielski wrote: > > > >> > >> > >>> On Aug 12, 2019, at 10:44 AM, Ted Dunning > wrote: > >> ... > "The Apache Podling Foo has voted

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

> On Aug 12, 2019, at 10:02 AM, Ted Dunning wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 9:24 AM Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> >> >>> On Aug 12, 2019, at 10:44 AM, Ted Dunning wrote: >> ... "The Apache Podling Foo has voted on releasing Foo 1.2.2 (url and pointers here). We have 3 (or more)

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

No, I don't mean to blame the mentors... It is a hard job, mostly uncelebrated and thankless and the 1st place people point to when problems arise. Also, in general, most mentors are those who suffer from volunteeritis and tend to bite off more than they can chew. But the reality is that they

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

Hi - > On Aug 12, 2019, at 8:44 AM, Julian Feinauer > wrote: > > Hi Ted, > > dont get me wrong, I'm rather new to the ASF, the incubator and especially > the IPMC. So my perspective might be different. But, I understand the > frustration that some may have and I leant that there have been

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

> On Aug 12, 2019, at 9:24 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > > >> On Aug 12, 2019, at 10:44 AM, Ted Dunning wrote: >> >> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 5:20 AM Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >>> ... >>> This does NOT mean that the IPMC should be gatekeepers though... Just as >>> PMC chairs are the "eyes

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 9:24 AM Jim Jagielski wrote: > > > > On Aug 12, 2019, at 10:44 AM, Ted Dunning wrote: > ... > >> "The Apache Podling Foo has voted on releasing Foo 1.2.2 (url and > >> pointers here). We have 3 (or more) binding votes from mentors. We are > >> giving the IPMC and

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

> On Aug 12, 2019, at 10:44 AM, Ted Dunning wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 5:20 AM Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> ... >> This does NOT mean that the IPMC should be gatekeepers though... Just as >> PMC chairs are the "eyes and ears of the board", mentors are the "eyes and >> ears of the

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

Hi Ted, dont get me wrong, I'm rather new to the ASF, the incubator and especially the IPMC. So my perspective might be different. But, I understand the frustration that some may have and I leant that there have been many trials to change things which didn’t go the way we wanted. The "fear" or

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

Julian, I love the sentiment, but increasing the probability of mentor-only approval by 10x is going to take a lot of something that we haven't had the last five times we have tried to do this. The current system is a bit frustrating, but having what amounts to mentors-at-large like Justin and a

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

Hi Ted, but instead of questioning the Bylaws or introducing two classes of artifacts I would rather try to improve mentor votes as this is something we can do incubator internal. And its always better to cure the cause then the symptoms : ) Julian Am 12.08.19, 16:44 schrieb "Ted Dunning" :

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 5:20 AM Jim Jagielski wrote: > ... > This does NOT mean that the IPMC should be gatekeepers though... Just as > PMC chairs are the "eyes and ears of the board", mentors are the "eyes and > ears of the IPMC". The IPMC "vote" should be little more than a formality. > IMO,

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

We were handling votes like that in OpenWhisk up until graduation. Mentor votes carry over to the IPMC vote. On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 07:20, Jim Jagielski wrote: > We have always had a mindset that we (the foundation) want to make it as > "brain dead easy" for people to download, use, and

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

We have always had a mindset that we (the foundation) want to make it as "brain dead easy" for people to download, use, and consume ASF projects. This means that they don't need to worry about compliance, IP provenance, etc. Incubator releases are a special case. The expectation is, and should

Re: Business decisions and risk (was: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases)

Thanks Greg, I am fully in support of your position here. The ASF is supposed to make it easier for developers to develop. It is not supposed to be creating red tape to guard the entrance to the hallowed halls. Ross From: Greg Stein Sent: Sunday,