On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote: > Regarding attrition of mentors, it was discussed having mentors 'sign' > the board report for their podling. Could that be encouraged, and used > as a sign of minimum 'activity' for a mentor?
I feel that what I am learning here is that my topic needs to go take a rest until the topic of non-responsible mentors is under control. > > Upayavira > > On Mon, Jan 9, 2012, at 08:10 AM, Sam Ruby wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 9:55 PM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > Sam, >> > >> > I started this separate thread because I view this situation as >> > distinctive from the problem you are referring to here. I take that >> > situation just as seriously as you do, I think. If you'd prefer that I >> > drop this (less urgent) problem until that one is under control. I'm >> > happy to do so. >> >> It is fair enough statement that not all of us need to work on what I >> happen to think is most urgent. This statement is true even if we >> might happen to agree on the relative priorities. >> >> I will merely point out that your suggestion is at least mildly at >> cross purposes to the issue that I want addressed. One of my concerns >> is that there are a number of podlings that are comfortably nestled in >> with no need to graduate. However, that is by no means my biggest >> concern, which is the silent attrition rate of mentors. In the case >> of Isis, I am fully prepared to accept that that podling has at least >> one active mentor. >> >> > No, I'm not asking for a blank check. I'm asking you and the other >> > more experienced people if you think that the idea of treating >> > Isis-like podlings differently from other podlings by giving them more >> > autonomy and less oversight makes any sense to you. If you all say, >> > 'no, we don't want to change anything,' I'll drop it. If you say 'hmm, >> > let's talk details,' then I'll attempt to flesh out details. However, >> > since your bottom line is 'make a more concrete proposal,' then I >> > will, but I will wait a bit to see if this thread attracts any other >> > thoughts about the overall concept first. >> >> You previously mentioned that there might be incubator requirements >> that are burdensome on mentors. Identifying those and ways to address >> them are things that I could definitely support. >> >> Looking specifically at Isis, the last report[1] to the board contained: >> >> Top 3 Issues to address in move towards graduation >> >> * More blogging/publicity from existing community... >> * More users of the framework... >> * More committers to the framework >> >> The latter might be a concern. The first two however are not direct >> concerns. At most, they are indirect: i.e., ways to attract >> committers. Looking at the incubator page[2], I see more than three >> committers, and in fact four of them are ASF members. If at least one >> of these ASF members intends is willing to continue on the PMC, and >> the lack of committers were the only issue, then I would be >> comfortable with this podling graduating. >> >> - Sam Ruby >> >> [1] >> http://apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2011/board_minutes_2011_10_26.txt >> [2] http://incubator.apache.org/projects/isis.html >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
