On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 12:14 PM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org wrote:
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 6:58 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
bdelacre...@apache.org wrote:
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com
wrote:
In short, the pTLP designation is a bit too
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 7:09 PM, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote:
...- do away w/ the pTLP name, just make it a regular TLP...
I don't like that, IMO pTLPs have to be explicitly flagged, to make
sure both users and Apache folks are aware of their immaturity.
-Bertrand
On Jan 27, 2015, at 6:58 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org
wrote:
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote:
In short, the pTLP designation is a bit too opaque
So you mean all TLPs should have status labels?
Might be
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote:
In short, the pTLP designation is a bit too opaque
So you mean all TLPs should have status labels?
Might be useful...probatory, active, low activity, attic candidate...why not.
-Bertrand
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 1:13 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
bdelacre...@apache.org wrote:
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 11:01 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
...The Apache Members are coming in as the PMC. This is a much more
serious commitment than being a Mentor. The pTLP is not an
IPMC
It's an *option* not the only route. Working for some but not others is just
fine.
Ross
-Original Message-
From: Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com]
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 11:23 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Cc: Chris Mattmann; Jim Jagielski
Subject: Re: my pTLP view
I
TL;DR I think this is a good idea.
I thought long and hard about this during the weekend and I’ve changed my mind
about this; I’ll spare you my handwringing thought processes. Some things that
I personally would like to see:
- do away w/ the pTLP name, just make it a regular TLP
- ComDev
Yes, formal votes for all decisions has been my *universal* experience on
all projects I have participated in at Apache. It's like there are two (or
more) different foundations, culturally. Thanks for the consideration.
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Branko Čibej br...@apache.org wrote:
On
On 25.01.2015 19:51, Andrew Purtell wrote:
That hardly ever happens (it's most likely when there are problems with
a podling's first few releases), which is why you get the impression
that the PPMC can make binding decisions.
Close. The PPMC membership feels they have made a
Purtellmailto:apurt...@apache.org
Sent: 1/23/2015 6:09 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.orgmailto:general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: my pTLP view
You are approaching this question with complete trust and faith in the
Apache process, being an Apache member, but an incoming / foreign community
That hardly ever happens (it's most likely when there are problems with
a podling's first few releases), which is why you get the impression
that the PPMC can make binding decisions.
Close. The PPMC membership feels they have made a decision that matters
with equal input.
Certainly on
On 25.01.2015 19:16, Andrew Purtell wrote:
With a PPMC we invite newcomers to make votes we call binding on matters of
their own project.
As other people have said, PPMC members (that are not also IPMC members)
do not have binding votes, neither for releases nor for inviting new
committers/PPMC
@incubator.apache.orgmailto:general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: my pTLP view
Go to the FIRST POST of this thread (titled: my pTLP view!!). THAT is
what we're talking about. Not the Strawman.
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org wrote:
Oh, my mistake! (smile) I confused pTLP
Go to the FIRST POST of this thread (titled: my pTLP view!!). THAT is
what we're talking about. Not the Strawman.
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org wrote:
Oh, my mistake! (smile) I confused pTLP with the Strawman proposal there
for a minute. In the pTLP
This is *exactly* the way things work in a TLP.
Yes, everyone new to the Foundation on the PPMC has a sense of equal
ownership in the process. The PPMC makes a decision together as equals,
then the decision is reviewed as a whole. But this is not how things would
work in a pTLP, right?
In all of the projects I have been PMC or PPMC on, we vote on releases, new
committers, and elevating committers to PMC.
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 11:56 AM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org
wrote:
This is *exactly* the
Apache Subversion uses discussion/consensus for all of those. We throw out
+1 and similar as shorthand for our preference, but we never tally, as it
isn't a formal vote.
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 1:58 PM, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org wrote:
In all of the projects I have been PMC or PPMC on,
Yes, and I briefly confused the two, and fessed up.
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
Go to the FIRST POST of this thread (titled: my pTLP view!!). THAT is
what we're talking about. Not the Strawman.
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Andrew Purtell apurt
I'm not arguing with you Greg (smile), honestly, Subversion sounds like a
very laid back place to participate. It's different in Bigtop, HBase,
Phoenix, Whirr (of historical note), and Hadoop (secondhand observation),
Hive (secondhand observation), ZooKeeper (secondhand observation) and
others.
They are reporting to the Board. We know what inactivity looks like. So we
ask the PMC to fix it, or we shut them down. Just this week, you messaged a
PMC asking if they had enough actives. There is ample precedent for us
detecting and working through inactivity.
On Jan 23, 2015 9:46 AM, Bertrand
On 1/23/15, 6:53 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote:
I agree with everything else you write, but the demand for only ASF
Members seems very hard. If I come to ASF with a community and a project,
I really would feel unhappy being cut out of the loop
Time for my weekly musings. Sorry, no oaths and
On Jan 23, 2015 8:53 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote:
On 23 January 2015 at 14:42, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
...
I agree with everything else you write, but the demand for only ASF
Members seems very hard. If I come to ASF with a community and a project,
I really would feel unhappy
Mattmann mattm...@apache.org
Subject: Re: my pTLP view
On Jan 23, 2015 8:53 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote:
On 23 January 2015 at 14:42, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
...
I agree with everything else you write, but the demand for only ASF
Members seems very hard. If I come to ASF
On 1/23/15, 1:34 PM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)
ross.gard...@microsoft.com wrote:
A good mentor is a guide, not a manager.
The proposals might seem top down, but when executed correctly, they are
not.
OK, I’ll accept that, but if executed correctly, the current Incubator
probably doesn’t
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 2:33 PM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote:
On Friday, January 23, 2015, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)
ross.gard...@microsoft.com
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','ross.gard...@microsoft.com'); wrote:
A good mentor is a guide, not a manager.
The proposals might seem top down,
...@jagunet.com
Subject: Re: my pTLP view
On 1/23/15, 6:53 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote:
I agree with everything else you write, but the demand for only ASF
Members seems very hard. If I come to ASF with a community and a project,
I really would feel unhappy being cut out of the loop
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 2:47 PM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)
ross.gard...@microsoft.com wrote:
All that being said, while I will (and already did two years ago) support
some experimentation with
the pTLP model I still feel that an Incubator with teeth scales better.
But we wouldn't know until
Corporation
-Original Message-
From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org javascript:;]
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2015 2:34 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org javascript:;
Subject: my pTLP view
On Friday, January 23, 2015, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)
ross.gard...@microsoft.com
@incubator.apache.org
Cc: Chris Mattmannmailto:mattm...@apache.org; Jim
Jagielskimailto:j...@jagunet.com
Subject: Re: my pTLP view
On 1/23/15, 6:53 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote:
I agree with everything else you write, but the demand for only ASF
Members seems very hard. If I come to ASF
, 2015 2:34 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: my pTLP view
On Friday, January 23, 2015, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)
ross.gard...@microsoft.com
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','ross.gard...@microsoft.com'); wrote:
A good mentor is a guide, not a manager.
The proposals might seem top down
+1
Microsoft Open Technologies, Inc.
A subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation
-Original Message-
From: shaposh...@gmail.com [mailto:shaposh...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Roman
Shaposhnik
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2015 2:51 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: my pTLP view
On Fri
I find the direction this discussion has gone personally disappointing, but
I might be missing understanding of some crucial point.
2. the initial PMC is comprised of only ASF Members. committers can be
chosen however the community decides. but the *project* is reviewed by
people with
, Inc.
A subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation
-Original Message-
From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org javascript:;]
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2015 2:34 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org javascript:;
Subject: my pTLP view
On Friday, January 23, 2015, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH
of Microsoft Corporation
-Original Message-
From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org]
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2015 3:21 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: my pTLP view
On Friday, January 23, 2015, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)
ross.gard...@microsoft.com wrote:
As ASF
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 6:18 PM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote:
On Saturday, January 24, 2015, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)
ross.gard...@microsoft.com
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','ross.gard...@microsoft.com'); wrote:
No, the PMC is *not* the driving force. The project community is, even
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 4:33 PM, Alex Harui aha...@adobe.com wrote:
On 1/23/15, 1:34 PM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)
ross.gard...@microsoft.com wrote:
A good mentor is a guide, not a manager.
The proposals might seem top down, but when executed correctly, they are
not.
OK, I'll accept
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 4:18 PM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote:
Remember we talk rules here, and rules should be made so the reflect what
we want, and I believe it is important that the community is represented in
the PMC, not 100% but also not 0%.
I still don't understand what's the extra bit
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org wrote:
Those of us in such a new incoming community might get the commit bit but
can't vote on adding committers,
See my reply to Jan. C == PPMC solves this completely.
or making releases.
This is *exactly* what is happening
You are approaching this question with complete trust and faith in the
Apache process, being an Apache member, but an incoming / foreign community
will not have this, not universally. Take the emotion out of this, because
I certainly am not being emotional here, but instead trying to evaluate
this
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 8:08 PM, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org wrote:
...
project, they become a PPMC, a podling. Sure, the IPMC provides oversight,
and the board again, but the PPMC can make binding votes on committers,
releases, everything that matters - provisionally, of course, which
because pTLP is an *option*
Sent from my Windows Phone
From: Andrew Purtellmailto:apurt...@apache.org
Sent: 1/23/2015 6:09 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.orgmailto:general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: my pTLP view
You are approaching this question with complete
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 5:34 AM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)
ross.gard...@microsoft.com wrote:
A good mentor is a guide, not a manager.
And a good manager is a Mentor ;-)
Niclas
+1000. My view too and with my support too.
-Original Message-
From: Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com
Date: Friday, January 23, 2015 at 5:42 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org general@incubator.apache.org, Chris
Mattmann mattm...@apache.org, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com
Subject: my pTLP
Mattmannmailto:mattm...@apache.org
Sent: 1/23/2015 7:18 AM
To: Greg Steinmailto:gst...@gmail.com;
general@incubator.apache.orgmailto:general@incubator.apache.org; Chris
Mattmannmailto:mattm...@apache.org; Jim Jagielskimailto:j...@jagunet.com
Subject: Re: my pTLP view
+1000. My view too
On 23 January 2015 at 14:42, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
Roman kicked off a query about next steps, with links to several wiki
pages on possibilities. The IncubatorV2 page which describes a
probationary TLP is nothing like I have thought about.
In my mind, a pTLP looks *exactly* like
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
...1. probationary text is prominent,...
...2. the initial PMC is comprised of only ASF Members...
I like that proposal, it's simple and looks actionable.
The only worry is what happens if the ASF Members on the PMC
46 matches
Mail list logo
