incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <>
Subject Re: Incubator reorg ideas: sub-groups per technology?
Date Sat, 15 Jun 2013 00:25:00 GMT
Hi Shane,

On Jun 14, 2013, at 3:58 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote:

> Apologies if this horse has been beaten already, but... have we discussed the concept
of splitting incubator operations into a handful of separate groups, based on technology areas?
> I.e. while the IPMC or ComDev or whoever would still set policy and provide community
best practice guidance.  But then separate mailing lists/groups would provide actual oversight
of podlings (incoming, mentoring, graduating).  These would be based on rough technology areas:
java, hadoop, servers, UI, whatever.

Here is an alternative. Incubator remains the same.

Add the following MLs in which IPMC members can participate.

(1) intake - this is where interested parties submit requests and interested parties evaluate
them. VOTE for new podlings can be here as now.
(2) community - this is where mentoring help and questions can be directed. Help navigating
infrastructure and community can be here. Graduation and shepherding can be here. VOTEs to
(3) release - this is where release packaging, IP, Notice, and License can go here. VOTE from
podlings needing extra IPMC can be here.
(4) general - remains for full IPMC discussions and reporting. The three other lists are committees
and report in to general with information about new podlings, community progress and IP/release

This will separate everything into different areas of IPMC specialization.

Ideally every podling would have at least one "release" mentor and at least one "community"
mentor active.

We will solve for "noise".

> That way, people could participate in governance oversight and mentoring in focus areas
that they care about, and not have to immediately deal with the many other podlings that are
not related in terms of technology/interest areas.

Do we really want jakarta@i.a.o or hadoop@i.a.o?

> Obviously there's a lot about coordinating suggested feedback on policies, best practices,
etc. between the groups and the core IPMC/ComDev., but it would (hopefully) result in most
of the groups being much quieter, and more focused.

Or much quieter and inactive - like some podlings?


> - Shane, off to make a G&T
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message