Hi,
I find it unfortunate that the PMC chair nominations got turned into a
debate about the future of the Incubator, especially when the original
reason to consider a new chair were fairly minor issues in timely
handling of PMC mechanics. As a fellow PMC chair I think it's
troublesome that people
On Feb 3, 2012, at 11:40 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
Hi Jim,
On Feb 3, 2012, at 5:55 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
[...snip...]
So that's 7 of 9 board members that are on the Incubator PMC, and
a good chance they are here now, and reading this.
What do Board members think? IPMC
Jim, I think you have expressed my concerns perfectly.
Mentors care for the podlings. Someone has to care for the mentors.
Not all mentors need help, not all podlings need help. We should provide
*support* all the way down for when it is needed. We should not confuse
interference with support.
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
I find it unfortunate that the PMC chair nominations got turned into a
debate about the future of the Incubator, especially when the original
reason to consider a new chair were fairly minor issues in timely
handling
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 7:47 PM, Doug Cutting cutt...@apache.org wrote:
On 02/04/2012 09:15 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
We both care about this stuff, which is why we keep replying. I'm happy
to continue to reply, so long as you are when I feel it's warranted. I've
ignored a few of them
On 2/5/2012 10:20 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
No. With all respect for Noel - we have discussed this multiple times
now. There is a need for a change because some administrative stuff
was delayed. There is a need for a change because on of us demanded it
(Bill if I remember right). Why
On 2/5/2012 12:37 AM, Luciano Resende wrote:
One thing that is not clear on the proposal is that it says that
releases will be responsibility of the TLPs, but it doest not suggest
or require that the actual existing ASF members that are part of the
TLP have to vote on the release. This might
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 8:22 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
On 2/5/2012 10:20 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
No. With all respect for Noel - we have discussed this multiple times
now. There is a need for a change because some administrative stuff
was delayed. There is a
Right now they are on very polar ends of the whole
discussion, which suggests neither until the incubator and board choose
a path forward.
I don't find the formulation 'polar opposites' helpful, let alone
prior remarks about whether the two of us can agree about something.
It's not up to us
On 2/5/2012 1:40 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
Just to set the record straight and get out of the way, *my* position
is that I do not feel particularly qualified to lead the charge in
presiding over the disassembly of the incubator. My alternative
proposal is not my 'election platform' -- it's
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 9:04 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
On 2/5/2012 1:40 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
Just to set the record straight and get out of the way, *my* position
is that I do not feel particularly qualified to lead the charge in
presiding over the disassembly
+1, simply more obstructionist rhetoric from Bill. Let's vote, if the board
wants something different we can vote again.
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 5, 2012, at 3:24 PM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 9:04 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net
+1
Mvgr,
Martin
2012/2/5 Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com:
Hi,
I find it unfortunate that the PMC chair nominations got turned into a
debate about the future of the Incubator, especially when the original
reason to consider a new chair were fairly minor issues in timely
handling of
FYI
-- Forwarded message --
From: Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com
Date: Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 5:11 PM
Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Hitoshi Ozawa as committer
To: connectors-priv...@incubator.apache.org
Oh, and I'm supposed to also tally which IPMC members voted in favor.
There were
On Sun, Feb 05, 2012 at 01:26:47PM -0600, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
It might be worthwhile to require 3 ASF members on the initial release,
2 on the next, 1 on the following and then trust the committee to follow
the established precedent.
+1
Instead of automatically decreasing the count,
From before the time my first project entered the incubator, it was
emphasized to me that each project (or podling) had to have at least
three active members, *not* just for diversity, but so that each
action taken by a project (or podling) would have three binding votes.
And the most
On 02/06/2012 01:41 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
On Sun, Feb 05, 2012 at 01:26:47PM -0600, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
It might be worthwhile to require 3 ASF members on the initial release,
2 on the next, 1 on the following and then trust the committee to follow
the established precedent.
+1
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Ate Douma a...@douma.nu wrote:
On 02/06/2012 01:41 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
On Sun, Feb 05, 2012 at 01:26:47PM -0600, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
It might be worthwhile to require 3 ASF members on the initial release,
2 on the next, 1 on the following and
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 2:06 AM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
My biggest problem is that the proposal moves undefined responsibilities to
ComDev while none of the candidates have actually spoken to ComDev about
this
As a comdev PMC member, I am opposed to making that PMC
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 5:22 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IncubatorDeconstructionProposal
As already mentioned by others, instead of deconstructing
On Feb 5, 2012, at 8:00 PM, Luciano Resende wrote:
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Ate Douma a...@douma.nu wrote:
I fully agree the current Incubator has its issues, but radically killing it
off IMO will also kill off more than just those issues: it will also kill
the Incubator community
On 03/02/2012 22:30, Alex Karasulu wrote:
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Maurizio Cucchiara
mcucchi...@apache.orgwrote:
Hi,
I can't abstain from taking part (the call of the patriotic spirit).
Jokes apart, I'm strongly interested in Identity Management (I have been
looking for a good
On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 10:29 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
bdelacre...@apache.org wrote:
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 2:06 AM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com
wrote:
My biggest problem is that the proposal moves undefined responsibilities to
ComDev while none of the candidates have actually
Thanks Bertrand.
I hope that ComDev can help with the future incubation. However, it is a
small PMC and thus any transition of responsibilities must be done in a
controlled and managed way.
Ross
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Feb 6, 2012 6:30 AM, Bertrand
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 1:27 AM, Craig L Russell
craig.russ...@oracle.com wrote:
Pain point 1: Podlings have to beg for binding votes for new committers. If
mentors are required to vote on new committers for their podlings, there are
three binding votes and the subsequent incubator pmc vote is
25 matches
Mail list logo
