Hi - Inline - responses to both.
> On Mar 28, 2018, at 4:15 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think the problem is serious. I also think that signoff rate is a better > metric in practice than it seems it would be. I agree that it is quite serious. > > Adding the additional metric seems like a small step that could help. > > Being aggressive about removing non-mentors is a very good idea. It is best > if mentors remove themselves, but it is imperative that the incubator has a > realistic idea about how many mentors there really are. > > > > On Wed, Mar 28, 2018, 17:20 Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> wrote: > >> The incubator has an ongoing problem with lack of mentor engagement. >> Mentors are a crucial component of the incubation process. Incubation is >> the time when projects learn the Apache Way, and they cannot learn in a >> vacuum. >> >> I’d like to discuss possible solutions to this problem. I’d like to hear >> from both podlings (PPMC members) and from IPMC members. >> >> (By the way, it’s not just a problem for podlings. As a mentor, I am >> demoralized when I feel my co-mentors are not pulling their weight, and I >> get a little closer to burn-out.) >> >> How to detect deadbeat mentors? One solution that has been discussed >> before is counting mentor sign-offs on podlings’ quarterly reports. Any >> project that received one or two sign-offs was deemed to be doing just >> fine. This is an imperfect metric. Sign-off means that Mentors are doing the least they can do which is better than nothing. >> >> Another remedy is to require podlings to be proactive: if they are not >> receiving adequate supervision, they should reach out to the IPMC and >> demand a change in mentors. The problem is, podlings have by definition not >> been through incubation before, so do not know what to expect. They don’t >> want to rock the boat. >> >> I propose another solution. Let’s add a question to the podling report >> template, as follows: >> >>> Have your mentors been helpful and responsive? If not, describe what >> advice or help >>> you needed, or need: >> >> It isn't too onerous for the podling, and only embarrasses mentors who >> deserve to be embarrassed. Mentors need to be careful of their workload. Having the correct mentors for the community is also important. What I mean about correct will be below. >> >> What to do about deadbeat mentors? The current thinking is that every >> project should have three mentors, and if at least one of them is active, >> that’s OK. I think that the “rule of 3” actually makes the problem worse. >> It’s difficult to find three motivated individuals (or find enough work for >> them to do), so a podling will inevitably have one or two inactive mentors. >> It has become the norm that most mentors are inactive. The rule of 3 was so that there were enough Mentors to provide the 3 +1 (Binding Votes) before we get to the IPMC Vote. Thankfully we have a few experts on the IPMC who are doing the required Voting and releases aren’t getting held up. >> >> I propose that we get rid of the rule of 3. If mentors are not active, >> they should be encouraged to step down, and if they don’t, the IPMC should >> remove them. If this leaves the podling with zero or one mentors, then IPMC >> can step in and appoint new mentors. A podling with two active mentors is >> probably doing just fine. We really need to have the correct Mentors. I feel uncomfortable as one of only two mentors on Daffodil. It is an experiment of having Two. >> >> Is this problem as serious as I think it is? Would my proposed solutions >> help? I think that we need to also discuss what voting +1 to accept a podling should mean. The value currently is that everyone just +1s because the podling is “cool”. I think we should discuss these ideas: (1) Adding more questions to the podling: - about the number of dependencies. If a lot then we want Mentors who like that part of the process. - about any registered trademarks. If so then a Mentor with trademark experience is needed. (2) Think about whether a +1 (binding) VOTE means the IPMC member is willing to Mentor. If we can’t get enough Mentors then we can’t accept a podling. Regards, Dave >> >> Julian >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> >>
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
