incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "P. Taylor Goetz" <>
Subject Re: Shepherd Shortage for December Report
Date Thu, 03 Dec 2015 02:51:49 GMT

> On Dec 2, 2015, at 9:01 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:21 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <> wrote:
>>> On Dec 2, 2015, at 5:53 PM, Marvin Humphrey <> wrote:
>>> It's not a concern -- it's a blessing. The shepherd institution needs to die.
>> Then I'd say let it die. My only concern is that that it offers a way for non-members
>> entry path to the ipmc. If we eliminate it, there should be an alternative for new
>> candidates to show interest and demonstrate merit.
> FWIW: I feel like there's plenty of way to generate that kind of merit: release
> reviews, report reviews, helping on podling MLs.
>>> There's been a shepherd shortage for years. What happened this month
>>> is that I took a bunch of people who were effectively inactive out of
>>> the shepherd rolls, so their absence is more obvious at the top of the
>>> report.
>>> The expectation that it is shepherds who review and comment on podling
>>> reports, rather than Mentors, is harmful.
>> That seems like a problem with documentation of the shepherd role -- and varying
degrees of individual interpretations.
>> I see a lot of podlings with deadbeat mentors (e.g. Ones that offer to mentor a proposal,
>> then go dark until graduation and suddenly reappear). I think we need a way to address
>> that. If mentors are absent, what's the fallback if there are no shepherds?
>> Is it the IPMC self-policing such things?
> I absolutely agree with you here. But IPMC has been through this conversation
> before and we all... well I guess we agreed to disagree. Even if we agree on
> trusting the mentors 100% to stay engaged, there's still an issue of mentors
> going "native" within a project. There *has* to be an independent view point
> injected. That's what shepherd role is to me. Somebody who'd have time
> to actually poke around not just read the report.

What about initiating a DISCUSS thread when the report reminders go out that serves as a reminder
to mentors/IPMC that they should weigh in on any issues (or non-issues) that they may be concerned

I have some concerns (that may or may not be valid), with zero or more podlings in the current
report list. If I'm not a shepherd or mentor, what's the best way to make those concerns known
to the greater IPMC?

> Thanks,
> Roman.

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

View raw message