incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <>
Subject Re: Nomination of Chris Mattman for the IPMC Chair (was: Re: NOMINATIONS for Incubator PMC Chair)
Date Fri, 03 Feb 2012 16:31:12 GMT
Hi Greg,

On Feb 3, 2012, at 1:44 AM, Greg Stein wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 00:58, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
> <> wrote:
>> ...
>> And to be honest, even if you (Bill) or the board folks think
>> that there should be an Incubation VP, are you willing to at least
>> try it my way, and then if all hell breaks loose, simply add the role
>> in 6 months (or sooner, if required?) IOW, we accept my proposal asi-is.
>> Then in 6 months, we'll see how it's working out, and I'll tell you what,
>> if we need an Incubation VP then, I'll be all for it, and even willing to sign
>> up for it.
> With my Director hat on, I would vote to keep the Incubator VP and
> only eliminate it when it is demonstrated to be of no value.

What in my proposal *doesn't* demonstrate that it's time to get rid of the VP?
I believe I've elaborated quite laboriously over the past week 
why I think the VP, Incubator position has served its purpose, just
like other VP positions that we've retired over time.

Can you address specific points in 
my proposal and tell me what I'm missing to demonstrate that
we don't need the Incubator VP and the IPMC anymore?

I'd argue that the following demonstrates that we don't need it, 
which for the record, are points in my original email thread and 
now proposal here:

1. Podlings will be projects. They will have a VP. That's the
interface between the board and the project, just like any other

2. Why add another officer position (or in this case, keep one), 
when we don't have met officer positions that "manage"
the reporting of standard TLPs (or sets of them) to the board? 
We've have several conversations over the years, e.g., in search, 
or in database communities here at Apache, that run something
like this:

"Oh, we have these sets of projects that are related, let's create a
meta committee that will [wrangle] them together, and then report
out on their status, share MLs, etc. etc."

Each and every time the above is presented, the argument against 
(besides maintaining the status quo, which I honestly think is being
pushed here) is that there is no need for such a meta committee 
(and by transitivity) a meta VP role. That's what the Incubator VP
is. A meta VP. We don't need the role.

> As I
> mentioned before, I believe there are aspects to incubation that
> require a supportive group which cannot simply be shifted to the
> podling-TLP

I don't agree with this. It's shifted to the project TLP. That's OK. 
Why is this not?

> or the Board.

I agree with this.

> The Board has enough to do without trying to
> *also* verify release processes, check on podling branding and press,
> etc.

You guys don't do that for projects, why would you do it in this case?

To summarize in a sentence my proposal:

"Get rid of the Incubator PMC, its VP, etc and just start treating incoming
projects like Apache projects, day 1."


Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA

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

View raw message