incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <>
Subject RE: Reform of Incubator {was; [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator)
Date Sun, 26 Jul 2015 22:04:45 GMT
Wait. I think this is overstating the "displeasure".

I don't see anyone saying the feedback is not valuable. I see mentors being asked to clearly
state their recommendation with reference to the feedback. The thread was too long and argumentative
to draw any conclusions.

I also see concerns that these issues are raised at the point of discussing graduation. That
is too late.

This separate thread goes in a significantly different direction and should jot be linked
to any specific discuss thread.

Sent from my Windows Phone
From: David Nalley<>
Sent: ‎7/‎26/‎2015 12:36 PM
Subject: Re: Reform of Incubator {was; [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator)

> Empower the Mentors to run the podlings, teach the newcomers and bring it
> to TLP.

As a mentor of podlings, I dislike the above idea.

Mentors get busy, they miss things, sometimes big things. Sometimes
things that are obvious to an outsider are missed by mentors who don't
catch it. I've certainly been guilty of missing things, and having an
'outside IPMC member' call attention to that has caused me to go find
not just that problem, but other problems with a podling.

Even on smaller issues, Justin and Sebb run circles around me in
validating that releases comply with policy. I've voted affirmatively
on releases that Justin or Sebb has found issues; occasionally glaring
issues. I do not think that just because I am a mentor on $project and
they aren't invalidates concerns they may raise. I may have additional
insight, and be able to explain things.

Similarly, a vote was brought to the IPMC as to whether or not to
recommend graduation. We asked people to inspect the podling and vote,
and for some reason seem displeased when everyone doesn't unanimously
agree with the mentors. I am not sure whether to interpret that as
'non-mentor IPMC votes are discouraged', or whether 'dissenting
opinions are discouraged'. But telling the body responsible (the IPMC)
to leave podlings in its charge alone, particularly when prompted by a
vote called by the podling itself hardly seems appropriate.


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

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