incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <>
Subject Re: Practical next steps for pTLP experiment
Date Tue, 24 Feb 2015 08:31:03 GMT
"if we accept" ... take a position, Ross.

The two problems *are* orthogonal. The IPMC can do whatever it likes. A
pTLP is a proposal to the Board.

Bertrand would like to see discussion on general@incubator, but that is
merely a handy location. It actually has zero to do with the Incubator.

Ross: if you believe that a pTLP is somehow tied to the Incubator, then
state that. Otherwise, please STOP throwing uncertainty into the waters.


On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 7:29 PM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) <> wrote:

> Fair enough. I don't think I ever agreed they are orthogonal. In fact the
> only concern I have consistently stated, and is reflected on the summary
> below, is that it, potentially, moves the problem rather than solves it.
> That being said, if we accept its orthogonal then your point is a good one.
> Sent from my Windows Phone
> ________________________________
> From: Roman Shaposhnik<>
> Sent: 2/23/2015 4:49 PM
> To:<>
> Subject: Re: Practical next steps for pTLP experiment
> On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)
> <> wrote:
> > It's not unfair. I deliberately tried to say i don't want to distract
> from the handover process.
> I though we all agreed that whatever pTLP is -- it is absolutely 100%
> orthogonal to
> the process that Incubator is in business of managing. There will be
> some overlap
> of people involved in both, but we don't need to wait on Incubator to
> proceed with
> pTLP any more than we'd need to wait on Incubator to do something in
> Hadoop land
> (although quite a few Hadoop folks are on IPMC).
> > I don't think its productive to make someone's support or otherwise of
> an experiment
> > to distract from getting the right chair to replace you.
> That would be a fair point if we didn't try as hard as we can to
> decouple the two.
> If what you're saying is: currently there's no way for Incubator NOT
> to be involved
> in pTLP AND if that's the opinion shared by the majority on the board,
> I'd have to
> re-evaluate things on my end.
> I thought Greg convinced you all that it must be de-coupled. That's what I
> based
> my calculations on.
> Thanks,
> Roman.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message