On Jun 14, 2013, at 3:58 PM, Shane Curcuru <a...@shanecurcuru.org> wrote:
> I.e. while the IPMC or ComDev or whoever would still set policy and provide > community best practice guidance. But then separate mailing lists/groups > would provide actual oversight of podlings (incoming, mentoring, graduating). > These would be based on rough technology areas: java, hadoop, servers, UI, > whatever. Mmmm, more mailing lists. There's a selling point. ;) You know, when I mentor a podling, I should't care what the technology is. (I learned the hard way about having an interest in the actual technology of the podling and have generated ill will as a result) A mentor can tell if a community "gets it" without having to know the technology. If anything, mentors who know the technology should not be allowed to mentor that project; an academic position, to be sure, given the dearth of active mentors. Regards, Alan
