incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Gruno <humbed...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Responsibilities and Improvements (was: Re: Whimsy general@ subs check
Date Wed, 06 Mar 2019 15:49:55 GMT
On 3/6/19 4:47 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> Merit does not expire. People who are not active today should be able to become active
tomorrow without having to jump through approval hoops.
> 
> In projects there is no concept of emeritus PMC. Here in the IPMC the issue is very different.
Most people earn merit transitively - become a member, become a mentor, become an IPMC member.
It's different.
> 
> Please don't use what is being discussed here as being transitive to a PMC based entirely
on directly earned merit.

Or put differently; why would we care that someone is inactive on the 
IPMC? Are we short on bytes on the LDAP server and need to conserve 
space? ;). It should make no difference if there are inactive members of 
the IPMC or not.

> 
> Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Dmitriy Pavlov <dpavlov@apache.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 5, 2019 4:46:09 AM
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Responsibilities and Improvements (was: Re: Whimsy general@ subs
check (was: .... introduce "[DISCUSS]" threads for podling ... release candidates))
> 
> I absolutely agree with Greg Stein. I can't find any single reason to keep
> unsubscribed members of IPMC in the roster. These members can be asked to
> subscribe, and if they do, then ok; if don't - it is perfectly ok to remove.
> 
> Similarly, I don't see reasons for having inactive TLP PMC members. I've
> suggested the same change in Apache Ignite, but I don't clearly understand
> why remained members resisting this change.
> 
> 
> пн, 4 мар. 2019 г. в 09:58, Ross Gardler <ross@gardler.me>:
> 
>> That's right Greg. And since we are filling in gaps for people...
>>
>> I was originally against the pTLP concept (though I supported the
>> experiments) or any of the derivatives that came from it. I think I have
>> changed my position. Largely based on the fact that every single project
>> I've discussed the ASF with in the last 3-5 years has had a very inaccurate
>> perception of how the ASF works. I believe a large part of this is due, in
>> part, to the issues being discussed in this thread.
>>
>> I do not understand how a foundation which prides itself in having very
>> little bureaucratic red tape can be seen as having so much red tape. The
>> projects I talk to just want to build software. It used to be that the ASF
>> focused on running the legal and operational aspects of the foundation
>> projects and developers on projects wrote code. I'm not sure that's true
>> anymore.
>>
>> We need to fix it.
>>
>> I look forward to hearing how the IPMC will seek to strip down the
>> bureaucracy and get back to mentoring the incoming projects on how the ASF
>> is structured so they can get (relatively) quick and clear answers to their
>> questions.
>>
>> Ross
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Greg Stein <gstein@gmail.com>
>> Sent: Sunday, March 3, 2019 10:19 PM
>> To: general@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Responsibilities and Improvements (was: Re: Whimsy
>> general@ subs check (was: .... introduce "[DISCUSS]" threads for podling
>> ... release candidates))
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 3, 2019 at 10:37 PM Ross Gardler <ross@gardler.me> wrote:
>>
>>> If a podling is a committee in its own right then it can be empowered to
>>> act on behalf of the board and this its releases can be an act of the
>>> foundation.
>>>
>>> ...
>>
>>> Podlings would only become full TLPs once they have demonstrated their
>>> ability to do formal releases.
>>>
>>
>> The above pair of concepts was offered in $priorCycle as "provisional TLPs"
>> (pTLP). I believe the idea ended when Sam pointed out that if a pTLP is
>> trusted, then why not just call it a TLP and trust it to label its releases
>> appropriately? Thus, just create TLPs immediately for a "podling"
>>
>> [ I know Ross knows this; but for $others who may want to look at
>> historical proposals, and compare/contrast to current discussion ... search
>> for "pTLP" ]
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -g
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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