incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <>
Subject Re: Incubator structure
Date Tue, 02 Apr 2013 14:21:21 GMT
Hi Upayavira,

-----Original Message-----
From: Upayavira <>
Reply-To: "" <>
Date: Tuesday, April 2, 2013 2:17 AM
To: "" <>
Subject: Re: Incubator structure (was Re: Vote on personal matters:
majority vote vs consensus)

>What I was trying to do with this particular thread is to identify the
>problems the incubator has before deciding on solutions. If we can get a
>common agreement on that, specific solutions will be much easier for us
>all to accept.

No problem.

I've articulated those for a while now, they were the original parts of
my proposal [1]. See the headings there that being with:

* Podlings are themselves distinct communities
* Podlings are more and more able to pick up on the basic principles of
Incubator documentation; its legal oversight and its processes
* Mentors encourage their podlings to operate autonomously

These are a combination of observations (based on problems), and problems
themselves, which have led to divergence in many of the core Incubator

The way I see it, many of the things that led me to write [1] still exist.
And, many of the small steps that we took to unhinge some of the problems
that were documented in [1] and the thread referenced in [1], such as
experiment" (to allow PPMC members VOTEs to matter more on releases), and
such as steps that we've taken to reduce the requirement for 3 +1s from
IPMC members to VOTE in a new PPMC member. Those are related to self
governance, and the recognition that podlings themselves should not have
to be so as dependent on folks from the IPMC, because it's a "wild west".

>So, my question to you is are you able/willing to articulate the
>problems do you see the incubator as having, that need to be solved?
>That is, without (yet) suggesting how it should be fixed?

Yes, I've articulated them for a while now. :)

What I appreciated from Niall, and anyone that reads my proposal, are
specific comments, backed with data, about the proposal itself. Sure
it has a plan of action (as any good proposal should), but it has
problems, and observations, that lead to that plan of action, too.

>I'd be very curious to hear how you see it.

Thank you for kindly considering my opinion Upayavira. I respect
and appreciate yours as well.



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