incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mattmann, Chris A (398J)" <chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Creation of the Incubator Ombudsman
Date Sat, 15 Jun 2013 18:48:35 GMT
+1, the chair is already the Ombudsman. Or should be at least.
No need for duplication and more overhead (and confusion).

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
WWW:  http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++






-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph Schaefer <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org>
Date: Saturday, June 15, 2013 10:52 AM
To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Creation of the Incubator Ombudsman

>This is a suggestion that has come up in the past, and the typical
>counter-argument is that this is something the chair needs to provide
>themselves.
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>On Jun 15, 2013, at 1:18 PM, Ross Gardler <rgardler@opendirective.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity
>> On 15 Jun 2013 16:53, "Alan Cabrera" <adc@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Problem: podlings are confused on where to go when there's a problem.
>>> 
>>> Cause: we seem to collect/handle/organize problems in an ad hoc manner
>> and sometimes mentors are the problem.
>>> 
>>> Solution: we create an elected Incubator Ombudsman.
>> 
>> From now on I'm only going to look at solutions in the context of the
>> issues on the wiki page. If a proposal doesn't apply to one or more
>>issues
>> I'm not interested.
>> 
>> In this case...
>> 
>> The only problem that would need an ombudsmen is ISSUE 01 (inactive
>> mentors). Mentors should always know where to go to solve a problem (we
>> have specialist committees for pretty much every issue that will
>>arise). If
>> mentors are inactive then ISSUE 01 is in play.
>> 
>> The current place to go is the IPMC. At this point ISSUE 03 may well
>>come
>> into play.
>> 
>> The idea of an Ombudsman overlaps with my earlier proposal for a
>> psuedo-board in the IPMC. Its also similar to both suggested solutions
>>for
>> ISSUE 03 in the wiki.
>> 
>> For these reasons I suggest the Ombudsmen proposal has merit.
>> 
>> I also suggest that this ombudsmen could be the organisation responsible
>> for acting if a podling (or a pTLP, if the experiment shows merit in
>>this
>> model) is failing.
>> 
>> As always the details needs to be ironed out but since the proposal
>> directly addresses ISSUE 03 I would like to see it explored. I
>>especially
>> like that it complements my pTLP experiment which is designed to address
>> ISSUE 01 (but clearly your proposal is worth exploring even without that
>> potential advantage).
>> 
>> Ross
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Alan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>> 
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message