incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Mclean <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases
Date Sun, 11 Aug 2019 04:47:31 GMT

> But, assuming that each podling has three active mentors, each podling should have 3
+1 IPMC vote before the RC goes to general@ and then is, as Sebb says below basically a "lazy"
consensus vote as 3 +1 are present and if no one throws in a -1 it will pass regularly and
is a regular release.

Sadly only about 10% of votes come to the incubator with 3 +1 IPMC votes, even on projects
with three or more active mentors not all vote for a number of reasons.

> So from my perspective we should really work on the Mentor activity then the "voting"
problem becomes minor.

It's certainly an issue, it improved a lot of the last few years but mentors could still be
more involved in some projects.

> Also I think our current practice of just saying "Interesting project, count me in as
Mentor" is not good as this leads exactly to the situation I described above.

It can do yes.

> So I would suggest to make the Mentor assignment somewhat binding, e.g. by IPMC Vote
or some other process and to force in the "activity" of mentors.
> I have no detailed idea how this should be done but if Mentors regularily do not vote
on Podling releases and do not signoff podling reports this is a sign that perhaps another
mentor has to step in.

Reports signing off is tracked. I use to keep track on inactive mentors, there's a strong
correlation between not been active and not signing off 3 reports in a row, Also if mentors
are missing podlings can put that in their report (there’s a question on that) and ask for
more mentors.

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

View raw message