incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net>
Subject Re: Podlings should be in charge of their mentors (was: Incubator report sign-off)
Date Mon, 05 Jan 2015 23:42:45 GMT
Hi Jan,

On Jan 5, 2015, at 12:18 PM, jan i wrote:

> On 5 January 2015 at 20:06, Alan D. Cabrera <list@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Jan 5, 2015, at 10:26 AM, jan i <jani@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Monday, January 5, 2015, Alan D. Cabrera <list@toolazydogs.com
>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','list@toolazydogs.com');>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Jan 5, 2015, at 9:21 AM, Roman Shaposhnik <roman@shaposhnik.org>
>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> The tracking part is easy, though. What's difficult is the part
>>>>> that would require us to do something with poddlings put
>>>>> on hold. Unless we come up with clear exit criteria for
>>>>> this new state -- I don't think we're solving any real problems
>>>>> here.
>>>> 
>>>> There’s no silver bullet here, if a podling cannot whip up a mentor it’s
>>>> because:
>>>> the podling is not popular and should probably be retired anyway, being
>>>> put on hold will provide impetus for the podling to seek out a new venue
>>>> there are not enough mentors
>>>> There is no way to magically solve the latter.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> You mean popular within the pool of mentors (IPMC), the project can still
>>> be popular on several other scales.
>> 
>> I’m not speaking of popularity of mentors; I regret that choice of words.
>> I am stating that active and healthy podlings seem to have no trouble
>> attracting active mentors.
>> 
>> The converse seems to be true.  Unhealthy podlings seem to attract mentors
>> who have signed up out of pity and subsequently go MIA.
>> 
> I agree with the last part, I still have to see mentors volunteer for small
> active and healthy projects which might not be main road. Of course it
> depends on how active and healthy is defined, but as an example my little
> project Corinthia barely managed to get 2 mentors, while in the same time
> span we got 3 committers.

Does Corinthia want another mentor?

I've already started lurking on your developer list because I am quite interested. I don't
know if I am a committer - yet.

You can add my name as a Mentor if the PPMC wants.

> 
>> 
>> Before anyone replies, I understand this is not a hard and fast rule but
>> an imperfect qualitative observation on my part.
>> 
>> Anyway, active and responsible mentors will eventually get to all podlings.
>> 
>>> I might lack experience, but why do more active mentors guarantee that
>> the
>>> podling will be a better TLP ?
>> 
>> I’m not sure who’s making that assertion.
>> 
> Well its because I cannot see why a podling need more than 1 active mentor
> at all times....having multiple is fine, to cover each other, but it should
> not take more than 1 mentor to learn a podling, what it needs to
> understand. The suggestion implicit says 2 mentors is the minimum needed
> for at podling to become a successful TLP.

Here are just a few reasons a podling needs multiple Mentors:

- Mentors need vacations too.
- Mentors have day jobs, sometimes these have stretches with months of 12-16 hour days.

> 
> 
>> 
>>> We try to solve the problem of mentors not being active but adding more
>>> volume. I don't believe that is the right cure.
>> 
>> We’re not adding volume.  The volume is already there.  We’re just making
>> the state of affairs more explicit and transparent and adding culpability
>> for MIA mentors.
>> 
> Do we have a rule today that a podling needs at least 2 active mentors (if
> we have that, then we would not have a problem with sign offs, or a lot of
> dead podlings), at least I have not seen it....that is what I mean by
> adding volume.
> 
> If just 1 mentor is active and sign off the reports, then I do not see the
> problem.
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>>> I do agree with bernard that it is the podling that should ask for
>>> help....but the IPMC should solve it.,
>> 
>> Yes, it should help solve problems but if there are no mentors available
>> there are no mentors available.
>> 
> Then the IPMC should not have accepted the podling in the first place!
> 
> It is simply not fair to make the life of a podling, depending on whether
> or not we have mentors available (REMARK after accepting the proposal) ! If
> the podling have a healthy community and are active, we cannot and should
> not close it down, just because we have a mentor problem.
> 
> To me telling a podling it cannot grow its community nor make releases, is
> the same as closing it down.

There can be lots of reasons mentors might not be engaged. Nothing may be happening in the
podling community. I can think of an example - ODF Toolkit.

Best Regards,
Dave

> 
> rgds
> jan i.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>> 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


Mime
View raw message