incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Noel J. Bergman" <>
Subject Incubator Roles revisited
Date Sun, 19 Feb 2006 00:15:23 GMT
J Aaron Farr wrote:

> Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> > [ ] - Any new proposal should have 3 ASF Members / Officers as
> > mentors (without regard to affiliation)

> Currently there's only one mentor, but there can be several champions.

We should probably revisit and
remind ourselves of what it says, why, and what we really intend.  And then
revise it as necessary to match the latter.

As per that document, the role of a Champion is to help bring the project
into the Incubator.  As I read it, and in my own view, the Champion role
pretty much stops there (the last sentence of the description
notwithstanding, since we should really be focusing on the health of the
burgeoning community).

As written, a Champion must be an ASF Member or Officer.  Why?  A Champion
actually has no specific rights.  Can anyone express a reason why the role
should be restricted to a Member or Officer?  One that comes to mind is as a
filter, but realistically, anyone can ask a PMC to sponsor a project.

The Mentor role lists a large number of responsibilities, but they boil down

  [The] Mentor automatically becomes a member of the Incubator
  PMC.  A Mentor has specific responsibilities towards the
  Incubator PMC

Turning this around, we have the comment I made earlier today:

  a Mentor is an Incubator PMC member who is choosing to be
  active and help in guiding the community

Without PMC membership, the Incubator specific notion of the Mentor role has
no real standing, which is why a Mentor must be ("becomes") a member of the
Incubator PMC.  Mentors are PMC Members who are providing active oversight
and guidance.

We've established a couple of policies:

  - All ASF Members who join an Incubator project as Mentor
    and/or Committer shall be automatically entitled to
    Incubator PMC Membership upon their own acceptance of
    the responsibility, and subject to the normal notification
    requirement to the Board.

  - Any ASF Member may ask to participate on the Incubator PMC.
    The Incubator PMC Chair shall submit the request to the
    Board (cc to the PMC) to be acknowledged.  At any time
    between the Member's request and prior to the expiration
    of the 72 hour period subsequent to the ACK, any current
    Incubator PMC member may object to the automatic selection.
    In the event of such objection, the selection will be
    cancelled, and a formal vote will be called.

The second rule is recent, and renders the first redundant and unnecessary.

We have also relatively broad agreement, and should formally settle, on
having multiple (3+) Mentors per podling, in order to help ensure legal

In addition, despite the "Mentor is a role undertaken by a permanent member
of the Apache Software Foundation" portion of the description, we have
previously elected non-Members to the Incubator PMC, and asked them to serve
as Mentors.

Following from the idea that a Mentor must be a PMC member, do we have a
need to require them to be an ASF Member, as per the current document, or
can we more simply drive the rule from the fact that a Mentor must be a PMC
member, which is effectively how we have been doing it?  Again, I get back
to saying that Mentors are PMC Members who are providing active oversight
and guidance.  Does anyone see any effective difference, since PMC members
have equal votes, and the only binding ones?  Other than apmember karma,
which means access to private information and the ability to contribute on
restricted infrastructure, what would an ASF Member have that isn't also
vested in someone whom we have otherwise chosen to vote onto the Incubator

	--- Noel

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message