incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benson Margulies <>
Subject Re: The report/review cycle
Date Sun, 13 Jan 2013 23:50:20 GMT
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:34 PM, Suresh Marru <> wrote:
> Hi Benson,
> + 1 for this time line, it really helps to have shepherds a day or two. I am sorry I
couldn't get my shepherd reports in this time with post-holiday catchup and sickness.
> I do not want to add too much to the process, but want to understand the buffer between
shepherd comments and your consolidated summary to the board.
> Working backwards:
> * Friday (before the board meeting week) VP IPMC submits the consolidated report to the
> * Shepherds review the mentor signed off reports and other activity and add comments
- Tentatively Due by ?
> * Podling's draft the report and mentors sign off by Wednesday (a week before the board
> I do think we have to leave it to each podling how they work through the reporting process,
but having a suggested timeline and workflow at [1] might help the new podlings understand
how the report funnels to the board.

I don't think that shepherds need to wait around for mentors.

Try this timeline:
                   T1                     T2            T3
                    |                        |              |
                 friday before        wed    friday before                 wed
                 friday before                 board meeting
board meeting
                 board meeting

T1: podlings deliver report content
T1->T2: mentors and shepherds review, comment, signoff
T2->T3: chair summarizes, IPMC reviews
T3->T4: chair makes small repairs in case of last minute comments or input

As you write below, how projects get their reports together, and
whether they anticipate the need for mentor signoff, is up to them.

> Something like... PPMC drafts the reports in the dev list -> Mentors iterate any comments
and sign off -> Shepherds review and provide any kudos external advice/comments -> IPMC
chair compiles the report with a over all summary (with an appendix of all podling reports)
-> Added to the board agenda -> Board members shepherd through the IPMC report ->
(feedback follows back?)
> It might be also helpful to explain in the same document, once the project graduates
how the process cuts short into ...TLP PMC chair drafts the report (with feedback from PMC)
->  Added to the board agenda -> Board members shepherd the PMC report -> feedback
is sent to PMC private list
> Cheers,
> Suresh
> [1] -
> On Jan 13, 2013, at 7:52 AM, Benson Margulies <> wrote:
>> This time around, the timing was as follows:
>> Wed 09-01-2013: Deadline for podling reports
>> Friday 11-01-2013: Practical board deadline
>> Wed 16-01-2013: Board meeting
>> In other words, we had a two day window for shepherds to digest
>> reports, then go dig around to fill in their picture.
>> Now, maybe things were unusually bad because of folks out for the new
>> year until 07-01-2013. But, still, I feel as if we don't have enough
>> time to react to reports (or the lack of reports) before we need to
>> have the board report in place.
>> What do people think of making the podling reporting deadline be a
>> full week before the board's deadline? The board wants a weekend to
>> review reports before they meet; I'd like a weekend for us to review
>> reports before we need to get them delivered to the board.
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message