incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <>
Subject Re: Release vote thresholds
Date Sun, 08 Dec 2013 21:28:23 GMT

On Dec 5, 2013, at 7:26 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Dave Fisher <> wrote:
>> I am only comfortable allowing singular IPMC votes from members of the ASF.
>> I think the IPMC owes this much to the other members of the Foundation.
> I've now contemplated this condition for a few days and while I'm prepared to
> accept it for the sake of compromise, I'm not in favor of it.
> As I look over the IPMC roster, there may be people who are not the strongest
> with regards to reviewing releases (they are often strong in other areas),
> but I don't see a correlation between those people and whether or not they
> were elected onto the IPMC.  If anything, it's the opposite -- the people who
> routinely miss errors, cast bare +1 votes with no explanations of what they
> reviewed, or fail to vote at all, are most often ASF Members who exercised
> their prerogative to join the IPMC by request.
> In contrast, the people who got onto the IPMC by demonstrating Incubator merit
> and getting elected tend to be more conscientious.  If any group stands out as
> particularly competent, it is those who were elected onto the IPMC first and
> subsequently became ASF Members.  But in my estimation, the group which would
> be excluded under this proposal -- people who were elected onto the IPMC but
> who are not ASF Members (yet) -- is on average, considerably above the level
> of the IPMC as a whole[1].
> So... I question whether this provision will succeed at guaranteeing that solo
> IPMC votes come from someone highly competent.  It complicates the release
> process by stratifying the IPMC.  And it doesn't jibe with my sense of
> meritocracy.

So, do you agree to the rule of three IPMC? Any Member can be on the IPMC. Your argument above
can be expanded to support the status quo. Can we drop the VXQuery experiment notion? I put
the "comfort" level and Member vs. IPMC as more of a thought experiment. 

> I'd rather that we go with Bertrand's proposal unmodified, which takes a
> different tack: striving to improve the quality of each vote cast.
> What do others think?

I am not an other, but...

I like where Bertrand's proposal is going and it is something that can be used to assess all
podlings great and small. My concerns and lack of comfort with this experiment were more to
do with notion that not being able to provide oversight was leading to an experiment with
institutionalizing less oversight. My argument about ASF members is that it is The ASF members
who are responsible - we elect the Board. My one was asking what would be the bare minimum,
it was more of a reductio ad absurdum.

I think that we all are looking for Incubation to be a natural growth of a community's culture
and not a process that involves unnecessarily high barriers. We are looking to create the
flattest petri dish possible.

What I like about Joe's experiment that the Incubator is the place to find people who are
member material as this is more visible to more of the membership than people who gain merit
within an individual TLP. You certainly agree.

My other point was that the notion of the VXQuery experiment was going to be an invalid experiment
because that podling has already had someone moved into the IPMC using the Joe experiment.
So, even if the release threshold experiment was worth pursuing in this case the results would
be hard to assess one way or another.

I think that the situation is very positive for VXQuery. The podling has shown sustainability
as it has refreshed the community with people who earned merit in the community while original
members have moved on. Next question is if they have enough numbers. Here we will run into
the 3 PPMC vs. 5 PPMC discussion.


> Marvin Humphrey
> [1] Let's avoid mentioning names on the public list.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message