incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Schaefer <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Expressing priorities about release reviews
Date Sat, 12 Jan 2013 17:49:09 GMT
If we ran infra the way this PMC
manages its own constituency, we
wouldn't have a single volunteer
willing to work constructively
with us.  Sometimes it's better
to let go of control and let people
work to impress you with the karma
you have given them.

> From: "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <>
>To: "" <>; Joe Schaefer
>Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2013 12:44 PM
>Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Expressing priorities about release reviews
>Totally agree, Joe.
>On 1/12/13 9:37 AM, "Joe Schaefer" <> wrote:
>>The thing is, as far as risk management
>>goes, the vetting we do on general@incubator
>>is largely ceremonial.  The real responsible
>>review work is done by people who are reviewing
>>commit activity, and it is a shame we don't
>>do a better job of empowering these conscientious
>>reviewers with a binding vote on a release.
>>> From: "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <>
>>>To: "" <>; Joe
>>>Schaefer <>
>>>Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2013 12:30 PM
>>>Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Expressing priorities about release reviews
>>>I agree with you on this Joe. A lot of times my metric is more
>>>responsiveness and participation than in legal/language intricacies. More
>>>power to folks who are good at that, it's just not me.
>>>On 1/12/13 9:07 AM, "Joe Schaefer" <> wrote:
>>>>One of my long time pet peeves with how we
>>>>PMC members participate in vetting releases
>>>>is our penchant for focusing too much on the
>>>>policies surrounding license and notice info.
>>>>I really think our exclusive focus on things
>>>>that really don't pose any organizational risk
>>>>to either the org nor the project participants
>>>>serves us well in our other, often unexpressed
>>>>but far more relevant, goals about encouraging
>>>>committers to participate in active review of
>>>>their project's commit activity.
>>>>Just think about this for a second, what's more
>>>>likely for people to start suing us over, some
>>>>bug in the NOTICE file or an undetected backdoor
>>>>in one of our programs?  I am personally far more
>>>>concerned about the current state of the actual
>>>>review going on in our podlings than I am about
>>>>NOTICE minutia.
>>>>Maybe we should compile some list of which committers
>>>>are actually subscribed to their project's commit lists?
>>>>It's crude but it may be useful data to look at to
>>>>a first order.
>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>>For additional commands, e-mail:
>To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>For additional commands, e-mail:
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message