incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alan D. Cabrera" <>
Subject Re: proposal: mentor re-boot
Date Wed, 07 Jan 2015 18:32:48 GMT

> On Jan 7, 2015, at 10:13 AM, Branko Čibej <> wrote:
> On 07.01.2015 18:42, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>> I’ve written up a more comprehensive proposal that would not only hold mentors
accountable but also give them a fair bit of autonomous authority during releases.
>> <>
>> 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 and confusing/diluted responsibilities.
 No more shuffling.
> What you're proposing, then, is that we institute mentor licenses with
> requirements over and above those for ASF membership. In effect, you'd
> create an additional level of earned merit for mentors ... which is
> probably a good thing.

I don’t think that I’m following.  Mentors need to be members of the IPMC but that doesn’t
mean they need to be ASF members.

> What I don't understand is this: where's the motivation for anyone to
> submit to this additional burden? There's a lot of stick in your
> proposal, but a woeful lack of carrot ... so, most likely not going to
> work for a bunch of volunteers.

What extra burden?  The proposal is not asking mentors to do anything more than what they
shouldn’t already be doing.  All the proposal does is hold the mentors accountable for their
inactivity and to add more of an incentive for PPMCs to be proactive in their relationships
w/ mentors; something that the PPMCs shouldn’t already be doing.

The carrot for both podlings and mentors is that there is no second gauntlet of voting/review
by the IPMC for releases.


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

View raw message