incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marvin Humphrey <>
Subject Re: Next steps for various proposals (mentor re-boot, pTLP, etc.)
Date Wed, 21 Jan 2015 22:03:32 GMT
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Dave Fisher <> wrote:
> Perhaps there are one or two good ideas in the proposals, but change does
> not need to be as jarring.

I hope that the Incubator can make the best of those opportunities.

> For example the IPMC ought to confirm with
> mentors if they are still being a mentor to a particular podling. There can
> be many reasons why not and we just need to ask. It could be that the
> podling never achieved a visible development community.

It's possible to automate pinging Mentors who didn't sign off on podling
reports.  A Python script could parse the last Incubator report (plus others
going back N months if we want richer historical info), then send one email
per podling to the podling's private list, CC'd to private@incubator.  The
script could be run by the Report Manager or the Chair each month after the
report is filed.

> Statements like shepherds dilute mentor responsibility are false. A shepherd
> provides a mechanism for the IPMC to review the Podling/Mentor relationship.
> This is something the IPMC needs to do when voting to graduate a podling. We
> should be ALL be doing shepherding work.

I can see what Alan's getting at, though.  Unless the podling is in trouble,
the podling contributors ought to be writing the report.  The people who are
then best placed to give informed feedback on that report are the podling's
Mentors.  But instead, the people who provide commentary on the state of the
podling community tend to be the shepherds, whose understanding is necessarily
more superficial.  Doesn't that seem strange?

Marvin Humphrey

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

View raw message