incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Roman Shaposhnik <>
Subject Re: Incubator Governance Change
Date Sun, 23 Apr 2017 03:43:29 GMT
On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 7:24 PM, Niclas Hedhman <> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 8:46 AM, Roman Shaposhnik <>
> wrote:
>> I'm starting to wonder whether the real solution here should be along the
>> lines
>> of what a board would do to a TLP if its active PMC shrinks to less
>> than 3 people.
> That will inevitable lead to definition of "what is active" and the whole
> "pity me/them for not having time" discussion that always arises when
> Mentor responsibilities are brought up.

True. But this is exactly what happens to a TLP, isn't it?

It is true that this will re-define mentorship expectations, but I think it
we may benefit from this re-definition in the long run. As it stands, being
a mentor today is way less commital than being a PMC member and
I don't think this is right.

I also suspect that re-defining commitment this way would serve
as a forcing function for potential podlings that don't get enough
engaged mentors up-front to fail fast (they won't be able to enter
Incubator) instead of getting stuck in limbo.

> I have been Mentor on 8 podlings;
>   * I was inactive on 1 of those (can't recall the reason)
>   * On 2 projects one other mentor was active.
>   * Remaining 5 projects, none of the other mentors did anything
> substantial, most nothing at all.
> Am I unlucky, scare others to inactivity, or is this what I think; people
> don't take the responsibility particularly seriously. "Oh cool project, I
> would like to be associated with that."
> Pat's suggestion is understandable, but not really viable.
> I would like to make a counter-suggestion, and I am sure IPMC won't like
> it, since it is filled with inactive, but sensitive, mentors;
>    * If the release is left dangling (not enough votes) for IPMC approval
> beyond 72 hours,
>      1. The release may be placed in the dist snapshot areas, so active
> community members have some stable milestone to work with,
>      2. An Incubator page (for instance the /projects page) is updated with
> a "Attempted Release - failed not enough votes" with dates and votes
> received. This will accumulate the data points for IF there is a real
> problem in the Incubator and we can gather the stats if we have
> irresponsible mentors or not. It also gives the podling a vent for the
> frustration.

This is exactly the kind of stats gathering I was referring to. At the
same time,
I think the line in the sand is pretty clear -- it only is stats
gathering. I don't
think releasing something out of ASF that hasn't had at least 3 binding votes
would be advisable.


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

View raw message