incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marvin Humphrey <>
Subject Re: Incubator structure (was Re: Vote on personal matters: majority vote vs consensus)
Date Thu, 04 Apr 2013 14:39:52 GMT
Benson writes:

>> We ask them to make a public statement of commitment that for some
>> period of time (six months) they commit to thinking of themselves _as
>> a PMC_, not just as some sort of diffuse advisors or coaches...

+1 to the change of mentality.

Bertrand replies:

> I like that - I'd say 3 months for the initial commitment, and ask
> mentors to indicate in the project proposal how many hours per week
> they think they can dedicate to the task.

The task that I think it's very important for the initial group of Mentors to
steward through to completion is the absorption of the code base and the
approval of the first incubating release.

Freelance IPMC members performing release reviews can check whether files have
the necessary license headers, but can't see how those headers got there,
whether all copyright relocations were performed appropriately, and so on.

If we're not entirely comfortable asking candidate Mentors to make specific
individual time commitments, there's an alternative: emphasize that the
initial Mentors **as a group** are signing up to supervise "phase 1" of
incubation, which involves IP clearance and concludes with a successful vote
on the first incubating release.

If Mentors fall away after "phase 1" ends, it's less of a problem.  Replacing
Mentors is less consequential once the code base has reached the "known good
state" of having made it through the release process.

Marvin Humphrey

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

View raw message