incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benson Margulies <>
Subject Re: Next steps for various proposals (mentor re-boot, pTLP, etc.)
Date Wed, 21 Jan 2015 11:39:12 GMT
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 4:03 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
<> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:38 PM, Chris Douglas <> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 11:57 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <
>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>>> How is that different from pruning the current IPMC membership by
>>> removing inactive members?
>> Doing *that* would be straightforward. Take the set of mentors on currently
>> incubating projects, add the other half dozen who review releases, and set
>> everyone else to voluntary emeritus status. Done....
> Agreed - but I don't see how that improves things anyway, I don't see
> any problem caused by those inactive members.

The near-ad-hominem tone of this thread has extracted a reply in my own defense.

It is a misunderstanding, verging on willful, to claim that the V2
proposal is primarily intended to remove either inactive or noisy
persons from the group. it is a fabrication that there is any idea
that some person other than the board  might select an initial set of
people to further some particular agenda. The idea here of the small
group, extracted from something Ross wrote on the Wiki in 2013, is
that an incubator committee doesn't need to be big and it doesn't need
to grow via merit, if its only job is to accept the board's delegation
of a limited set of supervisory tasks. If you make a smaller group, it
might still contain vigorous disagreement, but on a scale where they
can manageably reach consensus. It would think less of the board if
they failed to select people likely to have some significant

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

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

View raw message