Another cut at roles and responsibilities

[Berin Lautenbach <be...@ozemail.com.au>]

Peoples,

I have taken Stephen's page and attempted to integrate my understanding 
of the concept of a Sponsoring Entity (e.g. XML project in the case of 
XMLBeans).

This is all based on what I have seen during the course of the XMLBeans 
incubation startup.

Apologies for term *Sponsoring Entity*.  I couldn't come up with 
anything better on the spot.

I have also very much de-emphasised the role of the sponsor.  From what 
I've seen, the key role post acceptance is the Shepherd.  If the Sponsor 
wishes to become the shepherd, then they retain the responsibilities, 
otherwise they can move onto other things, having convinced an 
appropriate body in the ASF to take on the candidate.

Peoples - I am very happy to back these changes out, but I wanted to put 
continue the approach of having something concrete in place to help the 
discussion along.

Cheers,
	Berin


Stephen McConnell wrote:
> 
> I have prepared a new page based on the oringal content that
> Berin prepared. Here is a summary of the things I changed/added:
> 
> 1. cleanup of the descriptions and terminaolgy
>   (product/project/sub-project) etc.
> 2. simplification of the description of the pmc
>   (complemented with addition process content)
> 3. sharpending the description of the scope of
>   responsibility of the PMC chair
> 4. introduction of the notion of sponsor
> 5. harmonize content so that sponsor and shephard are
>   complementary
> 6. introductory description of the process end-to-end
> 7. breakout of all roles in an equivalent format with
>   identified responsibilities
> 
> http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?IncubatorMussings
> 
> I would appreciated any feedback concerning content and suggestions on 
> how we could proceed with migrating this to a structured set of policies 
> and procedures that could be adopted by the Incubator PMC.
> 
> Cheers, Steve.
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Another cut at roles and responsibilities

[Ted Leung <tw...@sauria.com>]

On 9/22/2003 5:23 AM, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:

> Berin Lautenbach wrote:
> ...
>
>> I have also very much de-emphasised the role of the sponsor.  From 
>> what I've seen, the key role post acceptance is the Shepherd.  If the 
>> Sponsor wishes to become the shepherd, then they retain the 
>> responsibilities, otherwise they can move onto other things, having 
>> convinced an appropriate body in the ASF to take on the candidate.
>
>
> Hmmm, I don't like the idea that sponsors can simply walk away in 
> incubation. It makes it easy to push for an idea and let others do the 
> hard work.

+1

>
> If someone doesn't want to do the work, then in my book he's not a 
> sponsor, as a sponsor gives something to get something, and in this 
> case he's just advocating.
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Another cut at roles and responsibilities

[Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>]

Berin Lautenbach wrote:
...
> I have also very much de-emphasised the role of the sponsor.  From what 
> I've seen, the key role post acceptance is the Shepherd.  If the Sponsor 
> wishes to become the shepherd, then they retain the responsibilities, 
> otherwise they can move onto other things, having convinced an 
> appropriate body in the ASF to take on the candidate.

Hmmm, I don't like the idea that sponsors can simply walk away in 
incubation. It makes it easy to push for an idea and let others do the 
hard work.

If someone doesn't want to do the work, then in my book he's not a 
sponsor, as a sponsor gives something to get something, and in this case 
he's just advocating.

-- 
Nicola Ken Barozzi                   nicolaken@apache.org
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

RE: Another cut at roles and responsibilities

["Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>]

> I like the notion of the "Sponsoring Entity" at this addresses
> the entity into which a prodling is destined.

Apparently, the part that "destination is an exit criteria" hasn't resonated
with you.  Yes, it is helpful to have an idea up front, but not in the sense
where you took it, specifically:

> Perhaps we could change the name to "Parent".
> if a cadidate aims to be top-level, its parent would be the Board.

IMO, the Board's involvement should not be required for an unproven podling.
That is the purpose of the Incubator PMC.  The Sponsor would be the ASF
Member/Officer who has sponsored the project.  Depending upon how many other
co-sponsors had been lined up, the Incubator PMC might be more or less
active in incubation to help fledge the new podling.

On the other hand ...

> If the project aims to enter into a project such as Avalon, the
> parent would be the Avalon PMC.

Then there should be no lack of people who ought to take an interest in
welcoming the hopefully-soon-to-be member of their TLP.  If that is NOT the
case, I would consider that a warning sign.

> 2.  Shepherd versus Sponsor.

The names may be interfering with the roles.  One is the Incubator PMC
representative, who is most likely going to focus on what criteria needs to
be met to allow exit; the other is the person who is going to focus on the
positive aspects of Community building and project development, although may
be asked as and when necessary by the Incubator PMC to address an incubation
criteria issue.

> Shepherd role should be maintained as monitoring,
> operational support, validation and assessment.

That sounds about right, AIUI.

> The Sponsor should not be a walk-away position

The role seems better viewed as Sponsor/Mentor.  One should not be permitted
to do the former without being willing to be the latter.  The person could
delegate tasks, but would still be responsible, and would need to keep on
top of whatever tasks were delegated.  Ownership of responsibility needs to
be clear, and resident in that one person, not groups.

To make this concrete, if the James Project wanted to incubate something,
then either an ASF Member or Serge, our PMC Chair, would have to be the
responsible party.  Serge could delegate tasks, but cannot delegate
responsibility.

Please note: other than the very first item way up top (destination), I
don't believe that we are actually disagreeing.  Just clarifying.

	--- Noel


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: Another cut at roles and responsibilities

[Stephen McConnell <mc...@apache.org>]

Berin:

Have just gone thought the changes.  I like the notion of the 
"Sponsoring Entity" at this addresses the entity into which a prodling 
is destined. Perhaps we could change the name to "Parent".  I.e. if a 
cadidate aims to be top-level, its parent would be the Board.  If the 
project aims to enter into a project such as Avalon, the parent would be 
the Avalon PMC.

There are two areas of concern I have in the current text.

1.  Entities (Board, Parent, Incubator PMC) should not assigned actional
    responsibilities - only decision responsibility.  Actional reposibility
    should be assigned to roles that are represented by accountable
    individuals.  There were a couple of places in the document that
    needed to be tightened up in this respect.

2.  Shepherd versus Sponsor.  In you text you have a sheperd assigned by
    the Parent (Sponsoring Entity) combined with a shift of responsibilities
    from Sponsor to Shepherd.  I'm not keen on this.  I think that the
    Sheperd should be assigned by the Incubator PMC irrespective of the
    Parent and that the Shepherd role should be maintained as monitoring,
    operational support, validation and assessment. The Sponsor should not
    be a walk-away position - instead I would propose a much strong
    relationship.  A Sponsor should expect to stay with a project throught
    the incubation and if for any reasons the Sponsor cannot do this, the
    the Sponsor should notify the respective entities and facilitate the
    introduction of a replacement Sponsor.

My impression is that we are actually aiming towards the same thing but 
that what you thinking of as Sheperd is what I'm thinking of as 
Sponsor.  There are a few other little things but I thought it best to 
get these two items clarified first.

Stephen.

Berin Lautenbach wrote:

> Peoples,
>
> I have taken Stephen's page and attempted to integrate my 
> understanding of the concept of a Sponsoring Entity (e.g. XML project 
> in the case of XMLBeans).
>
> This is all based on what I have seen during the course of the 
> XMLBeans incubation startup.
>
> Apologies for term *Sponsoring Entity*.  I couldn't come up with 
> anything better on the spot.
>
> I have also very much de-emphasised the role of the sponsor.  From 
> what I've seen, the key role post acceptance is the Shepherd.  If the 
> Sponsor wishes to become the shepherd, then they retain the 
> responsibilities, otherwise they can move onto other things, having 
> convinced an appropriate body in the ASF to take on the candidate.
>
> Peoples - I am very happy to back these changes out, but I wanted to 
> put continue the approach of having something concrete in place to 
> help the discussion along.
>
> Cheers,
>     Berin
>
>
> Stephen McConnell wrote:
>
>>
>> I have prepared a new page based on the oringal content that
>> Berin prepared. Here is a summary of the things I changed/added:
>>
>> 1. cleanup of the descriptions and terminaolgy
>>   (product/project/sub-project) etc.
>> 2. simplification of the description of the pmc
>>   (complemented with addition process content)
>> 3. sharpending the description of the scope of
>>   responsibility of the PMC chair
>> 4. introduction of the notion of sponsor
>> 5. harmonize content so that sponsor and shephard are
>>   complementary
>> 6. introductory description of the process end-to-end
>> 7. breakout of all roles in an equivalent format with
>>   identified responsibilities
>>
>> http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?IncubatorMussings
>>
>> I would appreciated any feedback concerning content and suggestions 
>> on how we could proceed with migrating this to a structured set of 
>> policies and procedures that could be adopted by the Incubator PMC.
>>
>> Cheers, Steve.
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-- 

Stephen J. McConnell
mailto:mcconnell@apache.org




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

RE: Another cut at roles and responsibilities

["Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>]

> I have also very much de-emphasised the role of the sponsor.  From what
> I've seen, the key role post acceptance is the Shepherd.  If the Sponsor
> wishes to become the shepherd, then they retain the responsibilities

I disagree.  One problem is that the terms seem to be getting overloaded.
But whomever is the Sponsor that brings the project to the Incubator, ought
to be willing to take on the responsibilities.  The Incubator isn't a
daycare center to drop off your kid.  And the Incubator PMC is there to
help, to guide, and to assist, but also to make sure that the project
doesn't leave the Incubator until it is ready to be a project of the Apache
Foundation.

A warning sign to the PMC ought to be lack of support from the Sponsor.  If
necessary, a "foster Sponsor" could be located, if there is one willing.

	--- Noel


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org