Why would adding another formal role solve the problem that saw the creation of shepherds (missing mentors)?
Are you tackling a different problem now? Unless there is a really solid reason for it I would be concerned about crating structure in the incubator that isn't present in the ASF proper. Should this new role be a better use of the existing champion role, complete with the handing over of that title to a PPMC member before graduation and a progression to PMC chair upon graduation? We discussed this some time ago and agreed it was a good idea but we never really carried it through. Ross Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity On 13 Jan 2013 08:46, "Benson Margulies" <bimargul...@gmail.com> wrote: > Right now, a shepherd assignment is a temporary job. It starts as the > reports for a cycle begin to come in, and it ends when the shepherd > feels that he or she has done what makes sense in terms of reporting > to the community and, in some cases, delivering some constructive > nudges to the projects. > > I've been thinking about an alternative, but it may not be popular. > > In my alternative, the IPMC organizes itself as follows: > > At the top of the pyramid, tied down to the Aztec altar, is me, the > chairman. > > Next down are the 'vice-chairs', currently known as the shepherds. > Each of these people is responsible for a group of projects, dispersed > across the reporting cycle. The shepherd, at least, tunes into the > reports, but also checks in during the three-month reporting period -- > particularly if we have identified issues that the project needs to > address. > > Next we have the mentors, who are 'inside' the projects, offering > guidance, coaching, and supervision. However, the fact is that we > don't have enough volunteers to have multiple, active, tuned-in > mentors for all of the projects all of the time. > > Last, but hardly least, are the freelance members of the committee, > who tune in on things like release reviews. > > If we adopted this plan, we'd add a shepherd slot to the metadata for > each project, and I, as chair, would take action if the designated > shepherd wasn't available to do a review for a project in a reporting > cycle. Either I'd do it myself, or I'd put out a call for assistance. > > I'm not going to defend this scheme tooth-and-nail. If folks prefer > the current approach, I'll focus on fixing the schedule to make it > easier to make it work. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
