incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benson Margulies <>
Subject Re: Cultivating Outstanding IP Stewards
Date Sun, 17 Nov 2013 13:24:08 GMT
Joining a PMC does not meaning being handed even one of the keys to
the launch console for a nuclear missile. Joining a PMC means
accepting responsibility for the supervision of a project. We vote to
add someone to a PMC when they have shown the necessary commitment
and, well, common sense. Part of 'common sense' is knowing what you
know and what you don't know. Not every PMC member needs to be
prepared to wade into every swamp, just as not every committer is
qualified to modify every class in the source code. We add committers
when have evidence to justify trusting them to do the right thing
(with the PMC as backstop supervision), and we add PMC members
similarly, with the backstop of the rest of the PMC.

On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 6:17 AM, Upayavira <> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 17, 2013, at 04:59 AM, Alex Harui wrote:
>> On 11/16/13 8:47 AM, "Upayavira" <> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >Alex,
>> >
>> >I'm not sure I see the difference between a release auditor and an IPMC
>> >member. If someone is sufficiently clued up to audit a release, then
>> >they're surely ready to join the Incubator PMC. Am I missing something?
>> To me, there is more responsibility in being on the IPMC, like reviewing
>> proposals for new podlings and voting on their graduation and becoming a
>> mentor.  Personally, that's why I don't want to be on the IPMC, but I
>> might be willing to help IP audit a podling's release.  Just like some
>> projects don't have all committers on the PMC, a Release Auditor is just
>> someone who can do that specific task, and there is no need to vote them
>> in if they are already on some other TLP PMC because any member of a TLP
>> PMC supposedly knows how to do release auditing.
>> >
>> >My interest is in a lesser level of involvement, where someone has shown
>> >merit within their own PPMC and can get a binding vote there, but
>> >no-where else. That feels to me like a very useful intermediate step to
>> >have.
>> I agree, except for the no-where else part.  If you know how to check a
>> RAT report and have an idea of what should be in the NOTICE files, you
>> should be able to help out any other podling by reviewing their release
>> and casting a binding vote so they can learn how to do that.  I'd say
>> that
>> 3 IPMC members must vote to give a person Release Auditor status if they
>> are not already on a TLP PMC.  Consider this:  I am an the Flex PMC but
>> not the IPMC, but if I join the PPMC of some new podling, why shouldn't I
>> be able to cast a binding vote for that podling's releases?
> With a two tier model - with PPMC membership granting voting rights on
> podling releases, then a podling would start with just mentors on its
> PPMC. If you clearly knew what you were doing, you'd get voted onto the
> PPMC pretty quickly, and thus you'd be able to vote on your releases.
> Upayavira
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message