On May 5, 2012, at 9:04 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote: > On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <l...@toolazydogs.com> wrote: >> >> On May 2, 2012, at 1:53 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> In order to better share the effort of reviewing podling reports and >>> giving constructive feedback where needed, I'd like to propose >>> something like the shepherd model the ASF board is using for project >>> reports. For each report a single "shepherd" [*] is assigned >>> responsibility for a deeper review of the report and any followups >>> that may be needed. Of course anyone within the IPMC is still welcome >>> to help in the review, and in any case the mentors of a podling should >>> review and sign off on the reports of their podlings. >>> >>> Any volunteer shepherds? Please sign up by adding your name to [1]. >>> >>> [1] http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IncubatorShepherds >>> [*] A shepherd watching over a podling... Perhaps someone has a better >>> agricultural term in mind? :-) >> >> I feel that I should state my opinion, and this is just my humble opinion, >> that the solution to a problem is not to add more process, bureaucracy, and >> roles. >> >> It's my opinion that this task should be done by the mentors, period. If >> people have spare bandwidth they then should sign up to be a mentor. >> >> Just my 2 cents. > > Thanks Alan, I always appreciate your input. > > However I think Jukka is simply asking for more "fresh" eye balls to > help in the review before submission of the composite report. The > shear time, and volume of work required to properly review all those > Incubator Podling reports can be overwhelming for a single person: > delegation is very sensible. > > I don't think there's more process or more bureaucracy. IMHO it's a > good, non-bureaucratic evolutionary step towards better management. > Honestly when I try to put myself into the IPMC Chair's perspective to > understand the amount of work and responsibility he has, I get > overwhelmed.
I understand and sympathize that it's a lot of work for the IPMC chair but frankly, I had always thought that this bit of responsibility was delegated to the mentors which is why mentors usually needed to be IPMC members. It is more process, reports are now to be checked by a new role in addition to being checked by the mentors, and bureaucracy, there are signup sheets, and now there are new roles, shepherds. Now the shepherds need to be tracked to see if there is sufficient coverage for report checking. IMNSHO, the elephant in the room is MIA mentors. Regards, Alan
