[PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
24 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

Justin Mclean
Hi,

I looked at the board resolution for the creation of the IPMC [1] and it says nothing about how IPMC members should be added so from that I take it that the IPMC can decide how it wants to do that.

Currently the IPMC can vote people in (which is not so common) or an ASF member can request it. I’m not sure where the ASF member requirement came from and wasn’t able to find the discussion about this on the incubator list. (If anyone knows please point me to it.)

In theory an ASF member should have the knowledge and skills to mentor a project, however I also think those who have gone through the incubating process, have voted on releases and proposed or accepted new committers and PMC members probably know just as much even if they are not ASF members. They may not have as much experience but shovel at least know the basics.

Now identifying everyone who has done this would not be be easy to determine and the Venn diagram of them and people who want to be mentors is probably small (but still significant in numbers).

So I propose this:

If someone has done several of the following:
- has been involved in an incubating project from start to finish
- has been a release manager
- has assembled LICENSE and NOTICE files
- has reviewed and voted on releases
- has proposed or accepted committers/PPMC members

Then they can ask the IPMC to join to IPMC by sending an email to private@ listing what they have been involved in. The IPMC would VOTE on them, and there’s a chance they could be rejected, but given it’s a private vote I don’t think any harm is done if that happens. Also people could nominate other people who fit into this above group.

I’d like to see this used for people who are wanting to be mentors, rather than just having binding votes on releases. I don’t have an issue with the later (and I think the IPMC currently does a decent job of catching any issues with releases they come their way), but that’s what I’m trying to solve with this proposal. i.e. We currently need more mentors and will need even more as ASF scales up.

The subject line is actually a lie. All this really changes is that people can bring themselves or be brought to the attention of the IPMC, rather than having the IPMC actively trying to find people from graduated projects who then may or may not want to be IPMC members.

We could start this off as an experiment. and take the first few people who request it, and see how it goes with more experienced mentors observing and/ or helping them.

What do people and the IPMC think of this proposal? Good idea or not? Could it work with some modifications? Is it not needed at all?

Thanks,
Justin


1. https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/websites/production/incubator/content/official/resolution.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

Sheng Wu
Hi Justin

Very interesting proposal. And I like it, also willing to request for that :)

From my experience, several projects have invited me or involved me in, such as Zipkin(Incubating) and IoTDB(In Incubator discussion). But because I can't be podling project mentor, based on Apache member rule you mentioned, I just show up as a contributor. If I could be the mentor for these projects, will be great.

Anyway, glad to see we have new option to solve `not enough mentor` issue.

Thanks Justin.

Sheng Wu
Apache SkyWalking


On 2018/11/06 08:20:18, Justin Mclean <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I looked at the board resolution for the creation of the IPMC [1] and it says nothing about how IPMC members should be added so from that I take it that the IPMC can decide how it wants to do that.
>
> Currently the IPMC can vote people in (which is not so common) or an ASF member can request it. I’m not sure where the ASF member requirement came from and wasn’t able to find the discussion about this on the incubator list. (If anyone knows please point me to it.)
>
> In theory an ASF member should have the knowledge and skills to mentor a project, however I also think those who have gone through the incubating process, have voted on releases and proposed or accepted new committers and PMC members probably know just as much even if they are not ASF members. They may not have as much experience but shovel at least know the basics.
>
> Now identifying everyone who has done this would not be be easy to determine and the Venn diagram of them and people who want to be mentors is probably small (but still significant in numbers).
>
> So I propose this:
>
> If someone has done several of the following:
> - has been involved in an incubating project from start to finish
> - has been a release manager
> - has assembled LICENSE and NOTICE files
> - has reviewed and voted on releases
> - has proposed or accepted committers/PPMC members
>
> Then they can ask the IPMC to join to IPMC by sending an email to private@ listing what they have been involved in. The IPMC would VOTE on them, and there’s a chance they could be rejected, but given it’s a private vote I don’t think any harm is done if that happens. Also people could nominate other people who fit into this above group.
>
> I’d like to see this used for people who are wanting to be mentors, rather than just having binding votes on releases. I don’t have an issue with the later (and I think the IPMC currently does a decent job of catching any issues with releases they come their way), but that’s what I’m trying to solve with this proposal. i.e. We currently need more mentors and will need even more as ASF scales up.
>
> The subject line is actually a lie. All this really changes is that people can bring themselves or be brought to the attention of the IPMC, rather than having the IPMC actively trying to find people from graduated projects who then may or may not want to be IPMC members.
>
> We could start this off as an experiment. and take the first few people who request it, and see how it goes with more experienced mentors observing and/ or helping them.
>
> What do people and the IPMC think of this proposal? Good idea or not? Could it work with some modifications? Is it not needed at all?
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
>
> 1. https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/websites/production/incubator/content/official/resolution.html
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

Atri Sharma-3
+1.

I get asked to mentor projects too, but have this restriction of not being
able to join the IPMC

On Tue, 6 Nov 2018 at 3:13 PM, Sheng Wu <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Justin
>
> Very interesting proposal. And I like it, also willing to request for that
> :)
>
> From my experience, several projects have invited me or involved me in,
> such as Zipkin(Incubating) and IoTDB(In Incubator discussion). But because
> I can't be podling project mentor, based on Apache member rule you
> mentioned, I just show up as a contributor. If I could be the mentor for
> these projects, will be great.
>
> Anyway, glad to see we have new option to solve `not enough mentor` issue.
>
> Thanks Justin.
>
> Sheng Wu
> Apache SkyWalking
>
>
> On 2018/11/06 08:20:18, Justin Mclean <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I looked at the board resolution for the creation of the IPMC [1] and it
> says nothing about how IPMC members should be added so from that I take it
> that the IPMC can decide how it wants to do that.
> >
> > Currently the IPMC can vote people in (which is not so common) or an ASF
> member can request it. I’m not sure where the ASF member requirement came
> from and wasn’t able to find the discussion about this on the incubator
> list. (If anyone knows please point me to it.)
> >
> > In theory an ASF member should have the knowledge and skills to mentor a
> project, however I also think those who have gone through the incubating
> process, have voted on releases and proposed or accepted new committers and
> PMC members probably know just as much even if they are not ASF members.
> They may not have as much experience but shovel at least know the basics.
> >
> > Now identifying everyone who has done this would not be be easy to
> determine and the Venn diagram of them and people who want to be mentors is
> probably small (but still significant in numbers).
> >
> > So I propose this:
> >
> > If someone has done several of the following:
> > - has been involved in an incubating project from start to finish
> > - has been a release manager
> > - has assembled LICENSE and NOTICE files
> > - has reviewed and voted on releases
> > - has proposed or accepted committers/PPMC members
> >
> > Then they can ask the IPMC to join to IPMC by sending an email to
> private@ listing what they have been involved in. The IPMC would VOTE on
> them, and there’s a chance they could be rejected, but given it’s a private
> vote I don’t think any harm is done if that happens. Also people could
> nominate other people who fit into this above group.
> >
> > I’d like to see this used for people who are wanting to be mentors,
> rather than just having binding votes on releases. I don’t have an issue
> with the later (and I think the IPMC currently does a decent job of
> catching any issues with releases they come their way), but that’s what I’m
> trying to solve with this proposal. i.e. We currently need more mentors and
> will need even more as ASF scales up.
> >
> > The subject line is actually a lie. All this really changes is that
> people can bring themselves or be brought to the attention of the IPMC,
> rather than having the IPMC actively trying to find people from graduated
> projects who then may or may not want to be IPMC members.
> >
> > We could start this off as an experiment. and take the first few people
> who request it, and see how it goes with more experienced mentors observing
> and/ or helping them.
> >
> > What do people and the IPMC think of this proposal? Good idea or not?
> Could it work with some modifications? Is it not needed at all?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Justin
> >
> >
> > 1.
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/websites/production/incubator/content/official/resolution.html
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

Shane Curcuru-2
In reply to this post by Justin Mclean
Great ideas, thanks Justin!

Justin Mclean wrote on 11/6/18 3:20 AM:
> Hi,
>
> I looked at the board resolution for the creation of the IPMC [1] and it says nothing about how IPMC members should be added so from that I take it that the IPMC can decide how it wants to do that.

The IPMC is a PMC just like any other PMC.  How the PMC decides to
choose new PMC members to recommend for a board ACK is up to the PMC, as
long as it's documented clearly.

> Currently the IPMC can vote people in (which is not so common) or an ASF member can request it. I’m not sure where the ASF member requirement came from and wasn’t able to find the discussion about this on the incubator list. (If anyone knows please point me to it.)

IMO the "ASF Members can request recommendation without vote" is because
of two factors: experience and oversight.  We (hope) Members have the
skills as you note as well.  Separately, since the IPMC is overseeing a
wide range of communities with an eye to inviting them to become an
official Apache project, we should allow Members to formally join the
IPMC to help oversee this process, since

...snip...
> Then they can ask the IPMC to join to IPMC by sending an email to private@ listing what they have been involved in. The IPMC would VOTE on them, and there’s a chance they could be rejected, but given it’s a private vote I don’t think any harm is done if that happens. Also people could nominate other people who fit into this above group.

+1, having a clear criteria as you list (to ensure it's people who
really have productively helped, and not just people status-seeking) and
an explicit call to "this is how you can *ask* to get voted into the
IPMC" is a great idea.  I agree, we definitely need a larger pool of
mentors for podlings, and helping committed non-Members be able to do
this is a great thing.


--

- Shane
  Director & Member
  The Apache Software Foundation

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

Kenneth Knowles
In reply to this post by Justin Mclean
I like this. I had the (apparently accurate) impression that ASF membership
was the usual route to podling mentorship. I'm very interested in
mentorship generally and ways I can help out ASF - so they might someday
intersect in the formal role of podling mentor. It is nice to see a path
that is not gated on ASF membership.

Kenn

On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 12:20 AM Justin Mclean <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I looked at the board resolution for the creation of the IPMC [1] and it
> says nothing about how IPMC members should be added so from that I take it
> that the IPMC can decide how it wants to do that.
>
> Currently the IPMC can vote people in (which is not so common) or an ASF
> member can request it. I’m not sure where the ASF member requirement came
> from and wasn’t able to find the discussion about this on the incubator
> list. (If anyone knows please point me to it.)
>
> In theory an ASF member should have the knowledge and skills to mentor a
> project, however I also think those who have gone through the incubating
> process, have voted on releases and proposed or accepted new committers and
> PMC members probably know just as much even if they are not ASF members.
> They may not have as much experience but shovel at least know the basics.
>
> Now identifying everyone who has done this would not be be easy to
> determine and the Venn diagram of them and people who want to be mentors is
> probably small (but still significant in numbers).
>
> So I propose this:
>
> If someone has done several of the following:
> - has been involved in an incubating project from start to finish
> - has been a release manager
> - has assembled LICENSE and NOTICE files
> - has reviewed and voted on releases
> - has proposed or accepted committers/PPMC members
>
> Then they can ask the IPMC to join to IPMC by sending an email to private@
> listing what they have been involved in. The IPMC would VOTE on them, and
> there’s a chance they could be rejected, but given it’s a private vote I
> don’t think any harm is done if that happens. Also people could nominate
> other people who fit into this above group.
>
> I’d like to see this used for people who are wanting to be mentors, rather
> than just having binding votes on releases. I don’t have an issue with the
> later (and I think the IPMC currently does a decent job of catching any
> issues with releases they come their way), but that’s what I’m trying to
> solve with this proposal. i.e. We currently need more mentors and will need
> even more as ASF scales up.
>
> The subject line is actually a lie. All this really changes is that people
> can bring themselves or be brought to the attention of the IPMC, rather
> than having the IPMC actively trying to find people from graduated projects
> who then may or may not want to be IPMC members.
>
> We could start this off as an experiment. and take the first few people
> who request it, and see how it goes with more experienced mentors observing
> and/ or helping them.
>
> What do people and the IPMC think of this proposal? Good idea or not?
> Could it work with some modifications? Is it not needed at all?
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
>
> 1.
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/websites/production/incubator/content/official/resolution.html
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

Kevin A. McGrail-2
In reply to this post by Shane Curcuru-2
I agree.  This is a policy for the IPMC to determine and I think this will
increase inclusion.  We need mentors and of all types.  +1
--
Kevin A. McGrail
VP Fundraising, Apache Software Foundation
Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171


On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 7:27 AM Shane Curcuru <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Great ideas, thanks Justin!
>
> Justin Mclean wrote on 11/6/18 3:20 AM:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I looked at the board resolution for the creation of the IPMC [1] and it
> says nothing about how IPMC members should be added so from that I take it
> that the IPMC can decide how it wants to do that.
>
> The IPMC is a PMC just like any other PMC.  How the PMC decides to
> choose new PMC members to recommend for a board ACK is up to the PMC, as
> long as it's documented clearly.
>
> > Currently the IPMC can vote people in (which is not so common) or an ASF
> member can request it. I’m not sure where the ASF member requirement came
> from and wasn’t able to find the discussion about this on the incubator
> list. (If anyone knows please point me to it.)
>
> IMO the "ASF Members can request recommendation without vote" is because
> of two factors: experience and oversight.  We (hope) Members have the
> skills as you note as well.  Separately, since the IPMC is overseeing a
> wide range of communities with an eye to inviting them to become an
> official Apache project, we should allow Members to formally join the
> IPMC to help oversee this process, since
>
> ...snip...
> > Then they can ask the IPMC to join to IPMC by sending an email to
> private@ listing what they have been involved in. The IPMC would VOTE on
> them, and there’s a chance they could be rejected, but given it’s a private
> vote I don’t think any harm is done if that happens. Also people could
> nominate other people who fit into this above group.
>
> +1, having a clear criteria as you list (to ensure it's people who
> really have productively helped, and not just people status-seeking) and
> an explicit call to "this is how you can *ask* to get voted into the
> IPMC" is a great idea.  I agree, we definitely need a larger pool of
> mentors for podlings, and helping committed non-Members be able to do
> this is a great thing.
>
>
> --
>
> - Shane
>   Director & Member
>   The Apache Software Foundation
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

Bertrand Delacretaz
In reply to this post by Justin Mclean
Hi,

On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 9:20 AM Justin Mclean <[hidden email]> wrote:

> ...I propose this:
>
> If someone has done several of the following:
> - has been involved in an incubating project from start to finish
> - has been a release manager
> - has assembled LICENSE and NOTICE files
> - has reviewed and voted on releases
> - has proposed or accepted committers/PPMC members
>
> Then they can ask the IPMC to join to IPMC by sending an email to private@ listing what they have been involved in...

I like that, +1

And maybe we should make sure each podling has at least one
experienced mentor, that is one who has successfully brought other
podlings to graduation, or a long-time ASF Member.

-Bertrand

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

Dave Fisher-5
Hi -

>> ...I propose this:
>>
>> If someone has done several of the following:
>> - has been involved in an incubating project from start to finish
>> - has been a release manager
>> - has assembled LICENSE and NOTICE files
>> - has reviewed and voted on releases
>> - has proposed or accepted committers/PPMC members
>>
>> Then they can ask the IPMC to join to IPMC by sending an email to private@ listing what they have been involved in...
>
> I like that, +1

I think that those items are hard to measure and are oriented to release policy only.

I would propose a simpler requirement.

- Any PMC member of any TLP including ComDev. We then do formal NOTICE to the Board and if there is a concern address it.

>
> And maybe we should make sure each podling has at least one
> experienced mentor, that is one who has successfully brought other
> podlings to graduation, or a long-time ASF Member.

- Experienced IPMC mentor is good, but these could be one who may drop out.
- I think we should explicitly look at the proposal and mentors listed and then express any concerns.

If we do this then I think the IPMC will need to make sure that we have enough active shepherds (or we need to discuss this on Justin’s thread about reading the report.)

Regards,
Dave

>
> -Bertrand
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

Myrle Krantz-2
On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 7:10 PM Dave Fisher <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi -
>
> >> ...I propose this:
> >>
> >> If someone has done several of the following:
> >> - has been involved in an incubating project from start to finish
> >> - has been a release manager
> >> - has assembled LICENSE and NOTICE files
> >> - has reviewed and voted on releases
> >> - has proposed or accepted committers/PPMC members
> >>
> >> Then they can ask the IPMC to join to IPMC by sending an email to
> private@ listing what they have been involved in...
> >
> > I like that, +1
>
> I think that those items are hard to measure and are oriented to release
> policy only.
>
> I would propose a simpler requirement.
>
> - Any PMC member of any TLP including ComDev. We then do formal NOTICE to
> the Board and if there is a concern address it.
>

You're right that some (not all) of the items are hard to measure.  I think
your counter-proposal would just push work to the Board (who simply won't
do it), and may result in podlings getting stuck with inactive mentors, and
limbo'ed releases.  Perhaps it's possible to cut the original list down to
things that are measurable, and change the approach from one of enforcement
to one of enlistment:

* Is willing and able to review and vote on releases for the podling.
* Is willing and able to coach the podling in proposing and accepting
committers/PPMC members.

The real goal here, I think, is not to specify criteria that the IPMC or
the board can apply.  The real goal is two-fold: a.) to give a potential
mentor the information necessary to determine if they can do the job.  And
b.) to create an instrument of commitment.  The mentor commits to involve
themselves in specific ways in the podling's incubation.

Best Regards,
Myrle
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

Dave Fisher-5
Hi -

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 8, 2018, at 3:43 AM, Myrle Krantz <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 7:10 PM Dave Fisher <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi -
>>
>>>> ...I propose this:
>>>>
>>>> If someone has done several of the following:
>>>> - has been involved in an incubating project from start to finish
>>>> - has been a release manager
>>>> - has assembled LICENSE and NOTICE files
>>>> - has reviewed and voted on releases
>>>> - has proposed or accepted committers/PPMC members
>>>>
>>>> Then they can ask the IPMC to join to IPMC by sending an email to
>> private@ listing what they have been involved in...
>>>
>>> I like that, +1
>>
>> I think that those items are hard to measure and are oriented to release
>> policy only.
>>
>> I would propose a simpler requirement.
>>
>> - Any PMC member of any TLP including ComDev. We then do formal NOTICE to
>> the Board and if there is a concern address it.
>>
>
> You're right that some (not all) of the items are hard to measure.  I think
> your counter-proposal would just push work to the Board (who simply won't
> do it),

Well the IPMC and not the Board. I admit I was pushing an extreme position as a device for focus.

> and may result in podlings getting stuck with inactive mentors, and
> limbo'ed releases.  Perhaps it's possible to cut the original list down to
> things that are measurable, and change the approach from one of enforcement
> to one of enlistment:
>
> * Is willing and able to review and vote on releases for the podling.
> * Is willing and able to coach the podling in proposing and accepting
> committers/PPMC members.
>
> The real goal here, I think, is not to specify criteria that the IPMC or
> the board can apply.  The real goal is two-fold: a.) to give a potential
> mentor the information necessary to determine if they can do the job.  And
> b.) to create an instrument of commitment.  The mentor commits to involve
> themselves in specific ways in the podling's incubation.

Yes, and commitment is the key. The IPMC can fix this if we take some examples.

(1) We have elected non-members to the IPMC. I was one. We should be more active in identifying merit.
(2) We take Justin’s and/or your list of criteria.
(3) We discuss potential IPMC candidates on private using the Beam model discussed dev@community. Specifically we start threads on private@incubator to track candidates as soon as an IPMC identifies a podling member getting the Apache Way.
(4) As merit is acquired we VOTE on private@incubator.

This approach follows the Apache Way. It makes the IPMC more closely operate like all other PMCs that are under the Board.

Regards,
Dave


>
> Best Regards,
> Myrle


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

Justin Mclean
In reply to this post by Bertrand Delacretaz
Hi,

Bertrand recommendation on having at least one ASF mentor or experienced mentor seems sensible to me.

Dave it is the case that some experienced IPMC mentor dropout. we currently need more mentors to replace missing ones than we do for new incubating projects, so initial most of these people are likely to help out on existing projects.

Re measurement “criteria", these are just some indicators not hard rules set in stone, but I think we need to give people something to go by otherwise we wont get anyone volunteering (as Myrle said). I would consider any PMC member who volunteered, but some may not have the right experience, (e.g. they were voting in due to code contributions, but have little experience with community building, policy or releases)

Thanks,
Justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

Justin Mclean-4
In reply to this post by Dave Fisher-5

Hi,

> Yes, and commitment is the key. The IPMC can fix this if we take some examples.
>
> (1) We have elected non-members to the IPMC. I was one. We should be more active in identifying merit.

This is part of the issue, but I think with a large IPMC and a very large pool of potential people it's a lot harder to recognise people with merit compared to other PMCs.

Anyone that is brought up for discussion, unless they are well known to several active IPMC members, doesn't tend to go anywhere. (e.g. see last person I brought up for possible inclusion in the IPMC).

Its also hard to recognise people who have merit from working in their podling (or even several podlings) as an IPMC member needs to be active in all of podlings to se that activity.

And finally when we do recognise people, there's probably a greater chance (compared to other PMCs) that they may not be interested in joining the IPMC as it may be tangential to their interests.

> (4) As merit is acquired we VOTE on private@incubator.

This proposal including voting for new IPMC members in the usual way.

Thanks,
Justin

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

Willem Jiang
+1 to elected non-members to the IPMC.
In this way, We could leverage hands from the PPMC member who has some
experience podling process.
From my experience I learned a lot from the whole podling process even
I mentored serval project before.

Regards,

Willem Jiang

Twitter: willemjiang
Weibo: 姜宁willem
On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 5:48 AM Justin Mclean <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> Hi,
>
> > Yes, and commitment is the key. The IPMC can fix this if we take some examples.
> >
> > (1) We have elected non-members to the IPMC. I was one. We should be more active in identifying merit.
>
> This is part of the issue, but I think with a large IPMC and a very large pool of potential people it's a lot harder to recognise people with merit compared to other PMCs.
>
> Anyone that is brought up for discussion, unless they are well known to several active IPMC members, doesn't tend to go anywhere. (e.g. see last person I brought up for possible inclusion in the IPMC).
>
> Its also hard to recognise people who have merit from working in their podling (or even several podlings) as an IPMC member needs to be active in all of podlings to se that activity.
>
> And finally when we do recognise people, there's probably a greater chance (compared to other PMCs) that they may not be interested in joining the IPMC as it may be tangential to their interests.
>
> > (4) As merit is acquired we VOTE on private@incubator.
>
> This proposal including voting for new IPMC members in the usual way.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

Roman Shaposhnik
In reply to this post by Bertrand Delacretaz
On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 1:28 AM Bertrand Delacretaz
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 9:20 AM Justin Mclean <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > ...I propose this:
> >
> > If someone has done several of the following:
> > - has been involved in an incubating project from start to finish
> > - has been a release manager
> > - has assembled LICENSE and NOTICE files
> > - has reviewed and voted on releases
> > - has proposed or accepted committers/PPMC members
> >
> > Then they can ask the IPMC to join to IPMC by sending an email to private@ listing what they have been involved in...
>
> I like that, +1
>
> And maybe we should make sure each podling has at least one
> experienced mentor, that is one who has successfully brought other
> podlings to graduation, or a long-time ASF Member.

I like both the original idea (after all I, myself, was one such case -- an IPMC
member before an ASF member) and this idea of a mentor-in-training
for podlings.

+1 to both!

Thanks,
Roman.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

Paul King
+1 to both from me too!


On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 12:22 PM Roman Shaposhnik <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 1:28 AM Bertrand Delacretaz
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 9:20 AM Justin Mclean <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > > ...I propose this:
> > >
> > > If someone has done several of the following:
> > > - has been involved in an incubating project from start to finish
> > > - has been a release manager
> > > - has assembled LICENSE and NOTICE files
> > > - has reviewed and voted on releases
> > > - has proposed or accepted committers/PPMC members
> > >
> > > Then they can ask the IPMC to join to IPMC by sending an email to
> private@ listing what they have been involved in...
> >
> > I like that, +1
> >
> > And maybe we should make sure each podling has at least one
> > experienced mentor, that is one who has successfully brought other
> > podlings to graduation, or a long-time ASF Member.
>
> I like both the original idea (after all I, myself, was one such case --
> an IPMC
> member before an ASF member) and this idea of a mentor-in-training
> for podlings.
>
> +1 to both!
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

Henry Saputra
In reply to this post by Justin Mclean
+1 to the new proposals.

The key is to have new potential members to be VOTED in to IPMCs, meaning
someone from existing IPMC should have know the criteria to be invited.

- Henry

On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 12:20 AM Justin Mclean <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I looked at the board resolution for the creation of the IPMC [1] and it
> says nothing about how IPMC members should be added so from that I take it
> that the IPMC can decide how it wants to do that.
>
> Currently the IPMC can vote people in (which is not so common) or an ASF
> member can request it. I’m not sure where the ASF member requirement came
> from and wasn’t able to find the discussion about this on the incubator
> list. (If anyone knows please point me to it.)
>
> In theory an ASF member should have the knowledge and skills to mentor a
> project, however I also think those who have gone through the incubating
> process, have voted on releases and proposed or accepted new committers and
> PMC members probably know just as much even if they are not ASF members.
> They may not have as much experience but shovel at least know the basics.
>
> Now identifying everyone who has done this would not be be easy to
> determine and the Venn diagram of them and people who want to be mentors is
> probably small (but still significant in numbers).
>
> So I propose this:
>
> If someone has done several of the following:
> - has been involved in an incubating project from start to finish
> - has been a release manager
> - has assembled LICENSE and NOTICE files
> - has reviewed and voted on releases
> - has proposed or accepted committers/PPMC members
>
> Then they can ask the IPMC to join to IPMC by sending an email to private@
> listing what they have been involved in. The IPMC would VOTE on them, and
> there’s a chance they could be rejected, but given it’s a private vote I
> don’t think any harm is done if that happens. Also people could nominate
> other people who fit into this above group.
>
> I’d like to see this used for people who are wanting to be mentors, rather
> than just having binding votes on releases. I don’t have an issue with the
> later (and I think the IPMC currently does a decent job of catching any
> issues with releases they come their way), but that’s what I’m trying to
> solve with this proposal. i.e. We currently need more mentors and will need
> even more as ASF scales up.
>
> The subject line is actually a lie. All this really changes is that people
> can bring themselves or be brought to the attention of the IPMC, rather
> than having the IPMC actively trying to find people from graduated projects
> who then may or may not want to be IPMC members.
>
> We could start this off as an experiment. and take the first few people
> who request it, and see how it goes with more experienced mentors observing
> and/ or helping them.
>
> What do people and the IPMC think of this proposal? Good idea or not?
> Could it work with some modifications? Is it not needed at all?
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
>
> 1.
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/websites/production/incubator/content/official/resolution.html
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

Liang Chen
In reply to this post by Justin Mclean
Hi

+1, I am chairman of TLP project and has been involved multiple incubating
projects from start to finish, also was responsible for multiple releases as
manager.

I would be glad to give help if some new incubator projects require.

Regards
Liang


Justin Mclean wrote

> Hi,
>
> I looked at the board resolution for the creation of the IPMC [1] and it
> says nothing about how IPMC members should be added so from that I take it
> that the IPMC can decide how it wants to do that.
>
> Currently the IPMC can vote people in (which is not so common) or an ASF
> member can request it. I’m not sure where the ASF member requirement came
> from and wasn’t able to find the discussion about this on the incubator
> list. (If anyone knows please point me to it.)
>
> In theory an ASF member should have the knowledge and skills to mentor a
> project, however I also think those who have gone through the incubating
> process, have voted on releases and proposed or accepted new committers
> and PMC members probably know just as much even if they are not ASF
> members. They may not have as much experience but shovel at least know the
> basics.
>
> Now identifying everyone who has done this would not be be easy to
> determine and the Venn diagram of them and people who want to be mentors
> is probably small (but still significant in numbers).
>
> So I propose this:
>
> If someone has done several of the following:
> - has been involved in an incubating project from start to finish
> - has been a release manager
> - has assembled LICENSE and NOTICE files
> - has reviewed and voted on releases
> - has proposed or accepted committers/PPMC members
>
> Then they can ask the IPMC to join to IPMC by sending an email to private@
> listing what they have been involved in. The IPMC would VOTE on them, and
> there’s a chance they could be rejected, but given it’s a private vote I
> don’t think any harm is done if that happens. Also people could nominate
> other people who fit into this above group.
>
> I’d like to see this used for people who are wanting to be mentors, rather
> than just having binding votes on releases. I don’t have an issue with the
> later (and I think the IPMC currently does a decent job of catching any
> issues with releases they come their way), but that’s what I’m trying to
> solve with this proposal. i.e. We currently need more mentors and will
> need even more as ASF scales up.
>
> The subject line is actually a lie. All this really changes is that people
> can bring themselves or be brought to the attention of the IPMC, rather
> than having the IPMC actively trying to find people from graduated
> projects who then may or may not want to be IPMC members.
>
> We could start this off as an experiment. and take the first few people
> who request it, and see how it goes with more experienced mentors
> observing and/ or helping them.
>
> What do people and the IPMC think of this proposal? Good idea or not?
> Could it work with some modifications? Is it not needed at all?
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
>
> 1.
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/websites/production/incubator/content/official/resolution.html
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:

> general-unsubscribe@.apache

> For additional commands, e-mail:

> general-help@.apache





--
Sent from: http://apache-incubator-general.996316.n3.nabble.com/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

Justin Mclean
Hi,

So with some with some minor modification looks like this is all good. I’ll get a draft of the changes to go on our web site.

If there’s anyone else who is not a member and think they have the experience to be an IPMC member please send to request to our private email list.

Thanks,
Justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

Makoto Yui-3
Justin,

I think it's a great idea. Podling project leads know the up-to-date
ASF incubation process very well.
It helps finding active mentors.

As a release manager and PPMC of an incubator project, requiring more
active mentor(s),
I would be glad to give help the following podling projects.

> - has been involved in an incubating project from start to finish

BTW, is this (made a TLP project from incubator) a requirement?
Or, on-going incubating project PPMC membe or committers can join to IPMC?

Thanks,
Makoto
2018年11月25日(日) 8:07 Justin Mclean <[hidden email]>:

>
> Hi,
>
> So with some with some minor modification looks like this is all good. I’ll get a draft of the changes to go on our web site.
>
> If there’s anyone else who is not a member and think they have the experience to be an IPMC member please send to request to our private email list.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

Gosling Von
In reply to this post by Dave Fisher-5
- I think we should explicitly look at the proposal and mentors listed and then express any concerns.


I am not sure am I missing some important discussion for the qualification of the IPMC :-) I read some of the reply carefully and very agree with explicitly list some concerns when we guide podling for their initial proposal, release notice. I have learn some points from the John and Justin share at ApacheCon. But with few green mentors to join the IPMC, Could we consider list it explicitly? I would like to see the Apache Projects could be more innovative and diversity.  

Best Regards,
Von Gosling

> 在 2018年11月8日,上午2:10,Dave Fisher <[hidden email]> 写道:
>
> - I think we should explicitly look at the proposal and mentors listed and then express any concerns.

12