incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joseph Schaefer <>
Subject Re: Cultivating Outstanding IP Stewards
Date Mon, 18 Nov 2013 12:12:03 GMT
I don’t see how the situation is any worse
than it is now, where no one on the project
currently has a binding vote on a release.
Going from that to “a few” may seem unfair,
but we have to start somewhere and we need
to keep in mind that this is partly a training
exercise, where we need to see people actually
demonstrate good judgement on policy matters.

Unfortunately this doesn’t solve the bootstrapping
issue directly with the first release, unless we
use it as a remedy for letting release votes stall.

On Nov 18, 2013, at 6:41 AM, Andy Seaborne <> wrote:

> On 17/11/13 11:17, 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.
> I am concerned that it would be dis-empowering to the incoming community if at least
the active and major developers of the podling were not on the PPMC at the start.
> 	Andy
>> Upayavira
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message