incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benson Margulies <>
Subject Re: Evolution instead of a revolution (Was: Time to vote the chair?)
Date Sat, 04 Feb 2012 18:44:14 GMT
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Ralph Goers <> wrote:
> On Feb 4, 2012, at 8:59 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>> Ralph, I'm inclined to hair up the chart to distinguish 'podlings'
>> from 'probationary projects'. Otherwise, fine. I'll do that.
> I see from your latest updates that you still have the podlings requiring IPMC approval
for releases and new members. I suppose that works if are only in the incubator a few months
but I can easily imagine a project performing a few releases and still preferring to stay
in the incubator while they build community.  I'd really prefer to delegate these to the
podlings, subject to approval from their mentors and only involve the IPMC if they can't get
the required mentor approval.  IOW, the vote threads would take place on the podling lists
and only the results would be published to the IPMC and the IPMC would use a process similar
to the board's for approval (I believe the new process is a 72 hr wait with an implied ack
upon receipt).

So, here's the difference I'm splitting. For what I hope can be a
really brief period of time, the podling is stuck with the IPMC just
as podlings are currently stuck with the IPMC. Thereafter, just as in
Chris' proposal, off they go to make their own mistakes. The advantage
of this, as I see it, is to avoid inventing any new governance
structure for the Foundation. Initially, in the IPMC, subsequently, on
their own.

However, if you and others would rather push this in a direction more
like: 'podlings are born self-governing under the supervision of the
IPMC, and move to self-governance under the supervision of the board'
(I'm thinking a bit of Roy's email) I have no objection at all, feel
free to edit it that way.

> What about the current requirement that mentors be members of the IPMC?  Personally,
I don't see the value of that, especially for ASF members.  The IPMC should be made up of
people who care about the incubator as a whole, not just specific podlings.

I agree. In either of the alternatives above, there's no reason to
load up the IPMC.

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

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

View raw message