Hi PJ and Willem,
Thank you for lending a hand, I have assigned you to different podlings[1].
[1]https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INCUBATOR/January2023
On Sun, Dec 25, 2022 at 8:24 PM Willem Jiang wrote:
>
> Hi Calvin,
>
> Please count me in.
> I think I can help with one to two podl
Hi Calvin,
Please count me in.
I think I can help with one to two podling reports per month.
Willem Jiang
Twitter: willemjiang
Weibo: 姜宁willem
On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 10:46 AM Calvin Kirs wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Shepherd[1] participation has been low for the past two years (maybe
> longer), so I th
Hi Calvin,
I can get involved if you are looking for volunteers. I have
reasonable availability for the foreseeable future.
Regards,
PJ
On Tue, 20 Dec 2022 at 03:45, Calvin Kirs wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Shepherd[1] participation has been low for the past two years (maybe
> longer), so I thought of tr
Hi,
Shepherd[1] participation has been low for the past two years (maybe
longer), so I thought of trying to see if any other IPMC members would
be willing to take on this role.
if possible, we could allocate them according to everyone's free periods.
so, if you are interested in this, please lea
Hi all,
> >
> > Roman wrote this regarding shepherds to me in an off-site discussion:
> >
> >
> > Shepherd have tremendous responsibilities by providing an independent
> > second opinion of the health of podlings back to the IPMC
> >
> >
>
On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Marvin Humphrey
wrote:
> > Please have that incorporated in the Roles and Responsibilities page (
> > http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Roles_and_Responsibilities.html)
>
> The shepherd institution is slowly tailing away as fewer and
On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 4:34 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Roman wrote this regarding shepherds to me in an off-site discussion:
>
> Shepherd have tremendous responsibilities by providing an independent
> second opinion of the health of podlings back to the IPMC
The fi
Hi Pierre!
On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 4:34 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Roman wrote this regarding shepherds to me in an off-site discussion:
>
>
> Shepherd have tremendous responsibilities by providing an independent
> second opinion of the health of podlings back to
Hi all,
Roman wrote this regarding shepherds to me in an off-site discussion:
Shepherd have tremendous responsibilities by providing an independent
second opinion of the health of podlings back to the IPMC
Please have that incorporated in the Roles and Responsibilities page (
http
On Dec 9, 2014, at 6:30 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> The following shepherds either did not provide, or did provide but saw no
> issues to comment on within their podlings:
>
> - Alan Cabrera
I am committed to reviewing the podlings for which I am a mentor. For other
podlings,
ec 10, 2014, at 11:26 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> Thanks for running the report, John! Not sure what
> the next step should be, but perhaps reaching out
> to these folks directly and asking whether they still
> want to be listed as shepherds?
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>
>
Thanks for running the report, John! Not sure what
the next step should be, but perhaps reaching out
to these folks directly and asking whether they still
want to be listed as shepherds?
Thanks,
Roman.
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 6:30 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> At least for this go around, I did
At least for this go around, I did the work manually (basically, scan the
report, see who had some problem that a shepherd could have helped with and
did the shepherd provide a comment). Comparing podlings that weren't quite
perfect to shepherds that made notes of it. I would say the foll
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 1:25 PM, jan i wrote:
> Seen from the POW of one who is new around here, it seems a bit like having
> a title for the sake of a title.
I mean, we have to call that function *something*
> I understand and value the functions of both "champion" and "mentor" and of
> course
quot;. But I fail to see the big difference between being
an official shepherd, and just helping a project.
I am sure I overlooked some of the finer differences, or maybe the titles
have just grown out of history.
I am willing to learn !
rgds
jan i.
> > It seems like we have some idle shephe
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 4:56 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I was wondering what everyone thought about the current shepherd program?
Honestly, I think this is one of the most undervalued and underutilized program
we have around here.
> It seems like we have some idle sh
>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Timothy Chen wrote:
>>>
>>> I just signed up few weeks ago and looking to help out when assigned.
>>>
>>> Tim
>>>
>>>>> On Nov 22, 2014, at 4:56 PM, John D. Ament
>>>&
M, John D. Ament
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I was wondering what everyone thought about the current shepherd
>> program?
>> >
>> > It seems like we have some idle shepherds, who maybe don't have the
>>
eks ago and looking to help out when assigned.
>
> Tim
>
> > On Nov 22, 2014, at 4:56 PM, John D. Ament
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I was wondering what everyone thought about the current shepherd program?
> >
> > It seems like we have so
I just signed up few weeks ago and looking to help out when assigned.
Tim
> On Nov 22, 2014, at 4:56 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I was wondering what everyone thought about the current shepherd program?
>
> It seems like we have some idle shepherds, who
Hi all,
I was wondering what everyone thought about the current shepherd program?
It seems like we have some idle shepherds, who maybe don't have the
bandwidth to help out all the time. What would everyone thing if we marked
idle shepherds w/ max_podlings = 0 so that they don't ge
Hi!
just wanted to say thank to Cos for
pitching in as a shepherd for this
report cycle. For now, he'll take over
the shepherding duties that I used
to be responsible for, but hopefully
he'll like it so much that there will
be more to come ;-)
Thanks,
Roman.
-
Hello,
the kafka project needs to clean up.
Steps are described here:
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#project-first-steps
Cheers
Christian
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 6:43 PM, Jun Rao wrote:
> Could you remove Kafka from the incubator report since it already graduated
> to a top l
Could you remove Kafka from the incubator report since it already graduated
to a top level project last Nov?
Thanks,
Jun
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 9:01 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sorry, I just realized I had replied in private and this is a comment for
> general@.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> On
Hi,
Sorry, I just realized I had replied in private and this is a comment for
general@.
Regards,
Dave
On Apr 1, 2013, at 4:59 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> I added a Shepherd signup area at the front of the report wiki page.
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/April2013
>
> I signed up for three
ust dive in however you all see fit, perhaps editing the
>> wiki to try to minimize conflicts, and I'll do better next time.
>
>
> Greg is right. We need either a script or just dive in. It shouldn't fall
> on you to do the assignments all the time. The PMC is the re
On Wednesday, February 13, 2013, Benson Margulies wrote:
> Indeed, the wiki format made rather a mess of this.
>
> I'm sorry, my degree of day-job-distraction has been kind of extreme.
> Please do just dive in however you all see fit, perhaps editing the
> wiki to try to minimize conflicts, and I'
Indeed, the wiki format made rather a mess of this.
I'm sorry, my degree of day-job-distraction has been kind of extreme.
Please do just dive in however you all see fit, perhaps editing the
wiki to try to minimize conflicts, and I'll do better next time.
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Matt Fra
I will note, as Vice Chairman, I've performed shepherd assignments when
Doug was buried. (we have a handy script that I wrote long ago, after
starting the shepherd process; makes it easy to share the task)
Point is: maybe somebody who is familiar with the IPMC shepherd process
could step in and do
Or... take the initiative.
At the Board level, the shepherds are the default liaison between the Board
and the PMC. But all Directors review all reports.
There is nothing which limits IPMC Members to review only the reports
"assigned" to them as shepherds.
Just start reviewing. Don&
Same here. I have been waiting to see my if any reports I need to pay
attention. Since we know what shepherd resources we have, can the assignments
be made earlier?
Suresh
On Feb 13, 2013, at 4:40 PM, Matt Franklin wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 8:24 PM, Benson Margulies
> wrote:
>> Sorry
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 8:24 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> Sorry, I'm really buried. I'll send some out.
The wiki format is hard to read, but it doesn't look like I got any
assignments this month. Anyone want to throw some my way, or do I
have a bye?
>
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 6:06 PM, Roman S
Sorry, I'm really buried. I'll send some out.
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 6:06 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I didn't get the usual memo -- is this expected?
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubs
Hi!
I didn't get the usual memo -- is this expected?
Thanks,
Roman.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
On Jan 10, 2013, at 6:58 AM, Alan Cabrera wrote:
>
> On Jan 10, 2013, at 5:58 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
>> Hi -
>>
>> I see from late November discussions about Ant and Jukka becoming new
>> Mentors for Chukwa.
>>
>> I see a VOTE for retirement with one voter continuing afterwards.
>>
>> Ret
On Jan 10, 2013, at 5:58 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> Hi -
>
> I see from late November discussions about Ant and Jukka becoming new Mentors
> for Chukwa.
>
> I see a VOTE for retirement with one voter continuing afterwards.
>
> Retirement?
After a long discussion and a bit of tuning with regard
Hi -
I see from late November discussions about Ant and Jukka becoming new Mentors
for Chukwa.
I see a VOTE for retirement with one voter continuing afterwards.
Retirement?
Regards,
Dave
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsub
On Jan 9, 2013, at 12:08 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>
>> I've assigned some sheperds
>
>
> I'm a bit late on my reviews, should have them done tomorrow.
I've done one of mine - Celix. I'll continue my look at Chukwa soon. From t
Hi,
On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> I've assigned some sheperds
I'm a bit late on my reviews, should have them done tomorrow.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 7:03 AM, Suresh Marru wrote:
> * Its only 3 months into the incubation so too early to complain, but the
> project should consider release early and release often. Do not wait too
> long to make a release.
>
There is work headed that way very soon.
> * The mailing list
I was pleased to a detailed report by the Drill PPMC and sign off by all the
Mentors. Email discussions like the thread "What do you want out of Apache
Drill" [1], should help the podling engage the community. Since the report is
detailed, I will skip adding kudos to all the points but over all,
I'm hoping we can reach a point where every project older than 6
months has done IP clearance; then as each project reaches 6 months it
either signs off on IP or is terminated.
Hen
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 7:14 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> After my recent adventure sorting out Kato's IP clearanc
After my recent adventure sorting out Kato's IP clearance, I have an
intention as a shepherd, and I'd like to suggest that others pick it
up, as well.
If a podling has not filled in the IP clearance field on their status
page, ask them what's going on, and ask them to report the status in
their re
We have discussed these two topics (committers and releases) around the
time of this report, but did not update the report to note this.
I hope the conversation will continue, and that wave will have more to
report for its next report.
Upayavira
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012, at 01:32 PM, Ross Gardler wr
The Wave project, in the main, seems to be doing OK. Mailing list
traffic is healthy, commits are happening and there seems to be good
diversity.
What is missing is new committers (none voted in since entering the
incubator) and a release (none made yet). However the report does not
address these
Jukka,
Agree with your and Ant's assessment
-- dims
On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 5:40 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 2:37 PM, ant elder wrote:
>> So strictly speaking this doesn't seem to meet the documented
>> Incubator graduation requirements.
>
> Thanks for the insigh
Hi,
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 2:37 PM, ant elder wrote:
> So strictly speaking this doesn't seem to meet the documented
> Incubator graduation requirements.
Thanks for the insight! It sounds like Wink should try attracting more
active committers or go try graduating into a subproject as discussed.
>-Original Message-
>From: Ross Gardler [mailto:rgard...@opendirective.com]
>Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 8:42 AM
>To: general@incubator.apache.org
>Subject: Re: Shepherds for podling reports
>
>On 10 May 2012 13:39, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote:
>>>-Origi
On 10 May 2012 13:39, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote:
>>-Original Message-
>>From: Ross Gardler [mailto:rgard...@opendirective.com]
>>Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 8:32 AM
>>To: general@incubator.apache.org
>>Subject: Re: Shepherds for podling reports
>>
&g
>-Original Message-
>From: Ross Gardler [mailto:rgard...@opendirective.com]
>Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 8:32 AM
>To: general@incubator.apache.org
>Subject: Re: Shepherds for podling reports
>
>Thanks Jukka,
>
>One of the issues to address for next time is
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 7:25 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>
> On May 9, 2012, at 12:23 PM, Luciano Resende wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Jukka Zitting
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the report, Wink, and for the review, Dave!
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Dave Fisher wro
Thanks Jukka,
One of the issues to address for next time is where to record
shepherds comments (if any). I suggest we do it directly in the
reports, in the Wiki. This requires no additional processes to
implement.
Once the shepherd process is working smoothly I'd also suggest that we
think
Hi,
I just submitted our May report to the board. Thanks a lot to anyone
who chimed in with reviews and other help! Very much appreciated.
Let's try this again for the next report, perhaps in a bit more timely
and organized manner now that we're through the initial setup and have
more volunteers
On May 9, 2012, at 12:23 PM, Luciano Resende wrote:
> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thanks for the report, Wink, and for the review, Dave!
>>
>> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>> From activity it looks like this project should have grad
On 9 May 2012, at 17:23, Luciano Resende wrote:
> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thanks for the report, Wink, and for the review, Dave!
>>
>> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>> From activity it looks like this project should have graduate
Hi,
Sorry for the delay. Something came up that took most of my attention
away from the Incubator for the last few days.
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 7:49 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> Well, the Wiki page explicitly says that the chair will assign.
If you have time, feel free to pick any of the repor
Hi,
Thanks for the report, Nuvem, and the review, Dave!
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> It is really hard to know what this project is trying to do other than be a
> common
> API for Cloud Apps. Very low activity. Apparently no users. A little pick up
> in
> dev activity r
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for the report, Wink, and for the review, Dave!
>
> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>> From activity it looks like this project should have graduated into a TLP a
>> year
>> ago. It looks like a mature and w
Hi,
Thanks for the report, Wink, and for the review, Dave!
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> From activity it looks like this project should have graduated into a TLP a
> year
> ago. It looks like a mature and well developed project. I don't understand why
> they think that t
ote:
> >> >>> 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-discussio
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.
>> >>>
>>
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 re
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
>>
Hi,
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Ross Gardler 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
That's perfect, thanks!
I'll
imilar 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;
>
&
e 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 p
Hi Alan...
On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> Thanks for replying with a thoughtful response.
>
> Jukka put forth the idea of shepherds as a proposal. I was merely
> replying to that proposal with my own considered ideas.
>
> I am encouraged about th
Thanks for replying with a thoughtful response.
Jukka put forth the idea of shepherds as a proposal. I was merely replying to
that proposal with my own considered ideas.
I am encouraged about the enthusiasm but I feel that it blurs the
responsibility of the mentor. Shepherding the shepherds
Hi Alan
For sure your point may be valid, but the whole point, if you read the
whole thread from the beginning, which I am sure you did, you will notice
that Jukka mentioned that this is a start and will assess the effort and
the whole plan after giving it sometime.
And actually having other pe
On May 5, 2012, at 11:07 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> If you don't want to be a Shepherd, don't sign up.
Yeah, I get that part.
> The board asked us
> to do a better job of reviewing reports and detecting mentor
> deficiencies.
I get that too.
> This is a plan to accomplish that.
My opinion
If you don't want to be a Shepherd, don't sign up. The board asked us
to do a better job of reviewing reports and detecting mentor
deficiencies. This is a plan to accomplish that.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incu
w 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 vol
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/
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 min
; 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.
>
> IOW, there is no big deal if both Mohammad
On May 4, 2012, at 9:35 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote:
> Hi Jukka...
>
> I also added myself, but as being a Mentor of CloudStack I would rather
> take (shepherdZ: DeltaSpike, Nuvem, Wink) while Dave Fisher takes (shepherdY:
> CloudStack, NPanday, VCL)
>
> Dave would you please ACK that ?
S
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
> On May 3, 2012, at 6:18 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
>...
>> The resulting TODOs are (see also the May2012 wiki page):
>>
>> - jukka: Airavata, Droids, SIS, Wookie, Zeta Components
>> - rgardler: Amber, PhotArk
>> - mfranklin: Ambari,
On May 3, 2012, at 6:18 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> OK, so let's see how this works out in practice. We have 19 podling
> reports to review by next Wednesday (Ambari is still empty).
>
> To keep the required effort down to a reasonable level, I divided
> these to six slots of three repor
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
Hi Jukka...
I also added myself, but as being a Mentor of CloudStack I would rather
take (shepherdZ: DeltaSpike, Nuvem, Wink) while Dave Fisher takes (shepherdY:
CloudStack, NPanday, VCL)
Dave would you please ACK that ?
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu,
Hi,
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:14 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> This looks like a mind expanding activity. I added my name for a maximum of 2
> per month.
Great, thanks!
Would you mind taking a look at for example Nuvem and Wink this month?
Or pick some other yet unclaimed reports.
BR,
Jukka Zitti
On May 3, 2012, at 2:06 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 8:23 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>> Added my name,
>
> Great, thanks!
>
> Would you mind taking the role of "shepherdX" this month and giving a
> closer look at Clerezza, Lucene.NET and Syncope?
>
>> but, haven't
Hi,
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 8:23 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> Added my name,
Great, thanks!
Would you mind taking the role of "shepherdX" this month and giving a
closer look at Clerezza, Lucene.NET and Syncope?
> but, haven't mentors already kind of volunteered for this by virtue that they
> are
2:09 PM, Ross Gardler
> wrote:
>> I don't imagine the "bucketing" to be enshrined in written process, or
>> even be fixed. More of a convenience. We might do it by, for example,
>> asking Shepherds to identify the projects they would *prefer* to
>> s
Panday, VCL
- shepherdZ: DeltaSpike, Nuvem, Wink
Please reply if you'd like to volunteer as one of the X, Y or Z
shepherds. No longer-term involvement required, if you like you can
just volunteer for a one-off round of reviews this month.
See my earlier mails [1,2] for a quick summary of the kind
I think it was me that was unclear. I was backtracking in the idea of
linking cross-community work to shepherds. I wasn't backtracking on the
idea of shepherds. Or, what you said ;-)
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On May 3, 2012 2:35 AM, "Greg Stein"
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
> On May 2, 2012 5:57 PM, "Greg Stein" wrote:
>...
>> Stated interests, and cross-community awareness are at odds with each
> other.
>>
>>
; > even be fixed. More of a convenience. We might do it by, for example,
> > asking Shepherds to identify the projects they would *prefer* to
> > shepherd and why. To continue my example above I might say "I have an
> > interest in any social related podling so I would p
On May 2, 2012 8:10 AM, "Ross Gardler" wrote:
>...
> I don't imagine the "bucketing" to be enshrined in written process, or
> even be fixed. More of a convenience. We might do it by, for example,
> asking Shepherds to identify the projects they would *prefer*
>-Original Message-
>From: Ross Gardler [mailto:rgard...@opendirective.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 8:09 AM
>To: general@incubator.apache.org
>Subject: Re: Shepherds for podling reports
>
>On 2 May 2012 12:50, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote:
>>>-Origi
Hi,
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> I don't imagine the "bucketing" to be enshrined in written process, or
> even be fixed. More of a convenience. We might do it by, for example,
> asking Shepherds to identify the projects they would *prefer* to
>
er looking
>>at what the next small step might be...
>>
>>I'd like to revisit the idea of grouping projects, e.g. big data,
>>content, semantic, social etc. I imagine that people willing to be
>>Shepherds will also have specific areas of interest. I imagine that
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Ross Gardler [mailto:rgard...@opendirective.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 7:24 AM
>To: general@incubator.apache.org
>Subject: Re: Shepherds for podling reports
>
>On 2 May 2012 10:19, Jukka Zitting wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>-Original Message-
>From: Jukka Zitting [mailto:jukka.zitt...@gmail.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 4:54 AM
>To: general
>Subject: Shepherds for podling reports
>
>Hi,
>
>In order to better share the effort of reviewing podling reports and
>giving cons
looking
at what the next small step might be...
I'd like to revisit the idea of grouping projects, e.g. big data,
content, semantic, social etc. I imagine that people willing to be
Shepherds will also have specific areas of interest. I imagine that
shepherds would get more value from their t
Hi,
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Ross Gardler
wrote:
> This is a good idea. I have signed up.
Excellent, thanks!
> I only ask you bear one thing in mind. Some months active people here
> have lots of their own podlings reporting, which takes quite a bit of time
> if done diligently. When as
> 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 watch
ty 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
98 matches
Mail list logo
