Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity. On May 8, 2012 6:50 PM, "Benson Margulies" <bimargul...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Well, the Wiki page explicitly says that the chair will assign.
To make sure they are all covered by at least one person, yes. However, I'm pretty sure doubling would be good - more eyes etc. (For what its worth I'd be happy for you to give any of the projects I'm a mentor or shepherd the once over. As my experience on Amber shows this month mentors sometimes miss important stuff , extra eyes to compliment my own are appreciated) > > On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > > No such thing as "leftover". Doubling up (or more) is just fine. > > > > Q is whether there are some under-reviewed... > > On May 8, 2012 6:40 AM, "Benson Margulies" <bimargul...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> I was late to volunteer. Do you have any leftover projects? > >> > >> On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Ross Gardler < rgard...@opendirective.com> > >> wrote: > >> > I've done my shepherd reviews and made one comment (about Amber) on > >> > this list). I'm not sure where you want general observations recording > >> > but I have moved the projects to the recommended status category > >> > > >> > On 7 May 2012 21:03, William A. Rowe Jr. <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote: > >> >> On 5/4/2012 1:27 PM, Greg Stein wrote: > >> >>> In the Board agenda, we have a line where each Director can state they > >> have > >> >>> reviewed the report (before the meeting). They can also append queries > >> and > >> >>> comments. Little mini-discussions kinda happen in those comments. > >> >>> > >> >>> Point here is: provide a similar location for IPMC members (including > >> >>> shepherds) to list their review/approval. There is no strict need to > >> divvy > >> >>> the reviews. Jukka is doing that as a transitionary measure until > >> people > >> >>> get into it. > >> >> > >> >> The approach would require just a couple of things; > >> >> > >> >> * designate a private report-review.txt file svn path which provides > >> svn > >> >> notification to the incubator-private list. Private, because both > >> personal > >> >> and confidential questions may be asked and answered in the scope of > >> that > >> >> approval/question/comment review file. > >> >> > >> >> * populate that file each month with the list of reports. Those > >> reports > >> >> themselves could continue to persist in the wiki or could be > >> transfered > >> >> into that internal edit/discuss report file. > >> >> > >> >> A comment to that svn review file would be broadcast, so that answers > >> and the > >> >> followup can either occur as a subsequent commit (asked and answered), > >> or can > >> >> evolve into an incubator-private mail list dialog (or be referred over > >> to the > >> >> podling-dev or podling-private list for clarification). > >> >> > >> >> In all I like the idea. > >> >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Ross Gardler (@rgardler) > >> > Programme Leader (Open Development) > >> > OpenDirective http://opendirective.com > >> > > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > 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 >
