incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Suresh Marru <>
Subject Re: If I were king of the forest
Date Wed, 08 May 2013 18:15:32 GMT
On May 8, 2013, at 3:31 AM, Alan Cabrera <> wrote:

> If I were king of the forest, I would be to fire all the mentors.  All except, of course,
me, because I'm the king.  :) All the ex-mentors would become emeritus mentors that can be
reinstated merely by asking.

There is a fundamental flaw here, there is no mention of how the king can be impeached and
a new king be sworn in :). kidding, great thoughts Alan, more below. 

> Those emeritus mentors who wish to remain mentors must acknowledge that they will perform
their duties as out lined in a clearly defined document.  All mentors must be IPMC members,
period.  People who wish to become mentors that are not in the IPMC must be a novice mentor,
whose mentorship is not counted as an active mentor, for at least one podling's incubation.
 ASF members can become IPMC members.  Non-ASF members must mentor a project before becoming
an IPMX member.
> The champion role would be removed.  
> Shepherd roles would be removed.

I certainly agree that this simple structure will be more sustainable then the work around
layers which we have seen slowly gets diluted. 

> Podlings would be required to have a minimum of two active mentors.  A mentor is free
to become inactive but must explicitly state this else the mentor risks being removed for
not performing their duties.  Podlings that do not have the minimum of two active mentors
are put on hold until they find enough mentors to fill the quota.  Being put on hold means
that no committers can be added, no PPMC members can be added, and no releases can be performed.
 It does not stop development.
> People starting threads must provide editorial summaries else the thread is considered
to be a tree falling in the forest.  If you can't commit to providing summaries then you shouldn't
start threads that waste people's time.
> Releases need +1 votes from the two active mentors.  A subsequent 72 hour quiet period
would follow for IPMC members to vote as well.

I am assuming (or rather hoping) the third vote will happen on the general list. Which ever
form the incubator (or lack of) shapes into, the general list is were I have seen the most
cross-fertizliation happens. I agree that we need to address releases not getting attention,
I felt the release trips to general were extremely educational. During incubation, this process
felt too painful and furstrating but looking back, release process and gets vastly improvised
during these iterations. And once set out on a right tone, its a matter of incrementally maintaining

> I would make hard decisions and actively retire inactive projects.
> I would start more tooling initiatives to automate even more mundane tasks that are a
drag to incubation.

+ 1. 

Constructive wishes over all,


> What we would gain is transparency and simplicity.  There would be no false expectations.
 Podlings would know where they stand.  Work would be equitably distributed.
> No more layers.  No more additional roles.  No more shuffling.  The solution is not more
process and more complexity.
> But I am not the king.  It is my sincere hope that we drop useless, imho, baby steps
that only serve to churn up email storms and ill will, and take the bold steps needed to re-invigorate
this, most critical, project of the ASF.
> Just my 2 cents.
> Regards,
> Alan

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

View raw message