GSoC Mentor vetting procedure

[Ulrich Stärk <ul...@spielviel.de>]

Folks,

I just want to shortly recap the results of our discussions from last year: We want individual PMCs
to be more involved in the mentor selection process and want them to lazy ACK mentors for their
projects. So a potential mentor will need to 1) request to be a mentor in google melange and 2) send
an email to code-awards@ and their individual private@<project>.a.o asking to be a mentor for
<project>. If we don't hear a NACK from <project> within 72 hours, we make that person a mentor.
Correct?

Uli

Re: GSoC Mentor vetting procedure

[mehdi houshmand <me...@gmail.com>]

Sorry, I'm some what unclear as to the vetting procedure, it doesn't
seem to be documented anywhere. Also, aside from our subscription
being accepted to code-awards@, is the list of accepted mentors
documented anywhere?

Thanks,

Mehdi

On 18 March 2012 07:31, Ulrich Stärk <ul...@spielviel.de> wrote:
> I'm OK with that, I'm just recapitulating what we discussed after last year's incident. Assuming
> lazy concensus. we'll invite pmc@a.o to begin applying as mentors in 72 hours, no changes to the
> mentor vetting procedure.
>
> Uli
>
> On 18.03.2012 04:59, Sagara Gunathunga wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Tammo van Lessen <tv...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi Ulrich,
>>>>
>>>> I applied as mentor for Apache ODE and I'm the PMC chair of ODE. Does
>>>> that mean I have to ACK (or not NACK) myself? Or do I need to let the
>>>> others PMC members vote for me mentoring a project? Sounds a bit
>>>> cumbersome to me.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>  Tammo
>>>>
>>> I agree with Tammo. The old process has been working ok for several
>>> years (with the exception of one incident last year).  I'd rather
>>> continue with the process (and maybe avoid any temporary account
>>> creation at apache)., and deal with issues when we find them. Anyway,
>>> just my 0.2c...
>> +1 In my POV better to continue with old process and address any
>> issues once they occur.
>>
>> Thanks !
>>>
>>> --
>>> Luciano Resende
>>> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
>>> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
>>> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>>
>>

Re: GSoC Mentor vetting procedure

[sh...@e-z.net]

The recognition by PMC of a GSoC project mentor should help
eliminate a problem I witnessed last year.

+1

Steven J. Hathaway
XALAN

> Now that I understood that no action by or within the PMC is required,
> I'm perfectly fine with the new procedure.
>
> So a non-binding +1 from me.
>
> Cheers,
>   Tammo
>
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 12:35, Ulrich Stärk <ul...@spielviel.de> wrote:
>> Do we have a concensus here? If so we will prepare a mail to pmc@
>> explaining the process.
>>
>> Uli
>>
>> On 19.03.2012 10:08, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>> On 19 March 2012 08:42, Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 4:38 AM, Nóirín Pluincéid <no...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> ...Mentors should have the backing of the PMC responsible for the
>>>>> project
>>>>> their student is working on - because we've promised that to Google,
>>>>> and
>>>>> because we need to know that if the mentor disappears, the PMC will
>>>>> step in....
>>>> +1, IMO we just need the PMC to say "we are ok with this GSoC project
>>>> happening with this mentor".
>>>>
>>>> Having the mentor CC their PMC list when they inform code-awards of
>>>> their intention to mentor, and someone from the PMC ack that, is not
>>>> much work and I think it's sufficient.
>>> +1
>>>
>>> The tiny bit of extra work for PMCs significantly reduces admin work
>>> if we have an issue like last year (I not none of the people who
>>> worked to resolve the issue last year are against this idea ;-)
>>>
>>> PMCs are supposed to provide oversight for their projects not anyone
>>> else.
>>>
>>> Ross
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
> --
> Tammo van Lessen - http://www.taval.de
>
>

Re: GSoC Mentor vetting procedure

[Tammo van Lessen <tv...@gmail.com>]

Now that I understood that no action by or within the PMC is required,
I'm perfectly fine with the new procedure.

So a non-binding +1 from me.

Cheers,
  Tammo

On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 12:35, Ulrich Stärk <ul...@spielviel.de> wrote:
> Do we have a concensus here? If so we will prepare a mail to pmc@ explaining the process.
>
> Uli
>
> On 19.03.2012 10:08, Ross Gardler wrote:
>> On 19 March 2012 08:42, Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 4:38 AM, Nóirín Pluincéid <no...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> ...Mentors should have the backing of the PMC responsible for the project
>>>> their student is working on - because we've promised that to Google, and
>>>> because we need to know that if the mentor disappears, the PMC will step in....
>>> +1, IMO we just need the PMC to say "we are ok with this GSoC project
>>> happening with this mentor".
>>>
>>> Having the mentor CC their PMC list when they inform code-awards of
>>> their intention to mentor, and someone from the PMC ack that, is not
>>> much work and I think it's sufficient.
>> +1
>>
>> The tiny bit of extra work for PMCs significantly reduces admin work
>> if we have an issue like last year (I not none of the people who
>> worked to resolve the issue last year are against this idea ;-)
>>
>> PMCs are supposed to provide oversight for their projects not anyone else.
>>
>> Ross
>>
>>



-- 
Tammo van Lessen - http://www.taval.de

Re: GSoC Mentor vetting procedure

[Ulrich Stärk <ul...@spielviel.de>]

Do we have a concensus here? If so we will prepare a mail to pmc@ explaining the process.

Uli

On 19.03.2012 10:08, Ross Gardler wrote:
> On 19 March 2012 08:42, Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 4:38 AM, Nóirín Pluincéid <no...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> ...Mentors should have the backing of the PMC responsible for the project
>>> their student is working on - because we've promised that to Google, and
>>> because we need to know that if the mentor disappears, the PMC will step in....
>> +1, IMO we just need the PMC to say "we are ok with this GSoC project
>> happening with this mentor".
>>
>> Having the mentor CC their PMC list when they inform code-awards of
>> their intention to mentor, and someone from the PMC ack that, is not
>> much work and I think it's sufficient.
> +1
>
> The tiny bit of extra work for PMCs significantly reduces admin work
> if we have an issue like last year (I not none of the people who
> worked to resolve the issue last year are against this idea ;-)
>
> PMCs are supposed to provide oversight for their projects not anyone else.
>
> Ross
>
>

Re: GSoC Mentor vetting procedure

[Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>]

On 19 March 2012 08:42, Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 4:38 AM, Nóirín Pluincéid <no...@apache.org> wrote:
>> ...Mentors should have the backing of the PMC responsible for the project
>> their student is working on - because we've promised that to Google, and
>> because we need to know that if the mentor disappears, the PMC will step in....
>
> +1, IMO we just need the PMC to say "we are ok with this GSoC project
> happening with this mentor".
>
> Having the mentor CC their PMC list when they inform code-awards of
> their intention to mentor, and someone from the PMC ack that, is not
> much work and I think it's sufficient.

+1

The tiny bit of extra work for PMCs significantly reduces admin work
if we have an issue like last year (I not none of the people who
worked to resolve the issue last year are against this idea ;-)

PMCs are supposed to provide oversight for their projects not anyone else.

Ross


-- 
Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
Programme Leader (Open Development)
OpenDirective http://opendirective.com

Re: GSoC Mentor vetting procedure

[Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>]

On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 4:38 AM, Nóirín Pluincéid <no...@apache.org> wrote:
> ...Mentors should have the backing of the PMC responsible for the project
> their student is working on - because we've promised that to Google, and
> because we need to know that if the mentor disappears, the PMC will step in....

+1, IMO we just need the PMC to say "we are ok with this GSoC project
happening with this mentor".

Having the mentor CC their PMC list when they inform code-awards of
their intention to mentor, and someone from the PMC ack that, is not
much work and I think it's sufficient.

-Bertrand

Re: GSoC Mentor vetting procedure

[Nóirín Pluincéid <no...@apache.org>]

On Mar 18, 2012 7:48 PM, "Luciano Resende" <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If we step back, what's the main issue we are trying to solve here ?

Mentors should have the backing of the PMC responsible for the project
their student is working on - because we've promised that to Google, and
because we need to know that if the mentor disappears, the PMC will step in.

> And how PMC's ACKs would help to solve that ?

Without a PMC ACK, I'm not sure how we can ensure these things.

Noirin

>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/

Re: GSoC Mentor vetting procedure

[Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Nóirín Pluincéid <no...@apache.org> wrote:
> I'm not ok with that. I think it's important to vet mentors better
> than we have in the past--I know that it pushes some extra work onto
> the PMCs and mentors, but if we're going to keep asking for the number
> of projects we've had in the past, the admins can't do all the work.
> And as we get bigger and GSoC gets more and more popular, it's
> important to be reasonably thorough about this.
>
> Noirin
>

If we step back, what's the main issue we are trying to solve here ?
And how PMC's ACKs would help to solve that ?

-- 
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/

Re: GSoC Mentor vetting procedure

[Nóirín Pluincéid <no...@apache.org>]

I'm not ok with that. I think it's important to vet mentors better
than we have in the past--I know that it pushes some extra work onto
the PMCs and mentors, but if we're going to keep asking for the number
of projects we've had in the past, the admins can't do all the work.
And as we get bigger and GSoC gets more and more popular, it's
important to be reasonably thorough about this.

Noirin

On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 12:31 AM, Ulrich Stärk <ul...@spielviel.de> wrote:
> I'm OK with that, I'm just recapitulating what we discussed after last year's incident. Assuming
> lazy concensus. we'll invite pmc@a.o to begin applying as mentors in 72 hours, no changes to the
> mentor vetting procedure.
>
> Uli
>
> On 18.03.2012 04:59, Sagara Gunathunga wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Tammo van Lessen <tv...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi Ulrich,
>>>>
>>>> I applied as mentor for Apache ODE and I'm the PMC chair of ODE. Does
>>>> that mean I have to ACK (or not NACK) myself? Or do I need to let the
>>>> others PMC members vote for me mentoring a project? Sounds a bit
>>>> cumbersome to me.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>  Tammo
>>>>
>>> I agree with Tammo. The old process has been working ok for several
>>> years (with the exception of one incident last year).  I'd rather
>>> continue with the process (and maybe avoid any temporary account
>>> creation at apache)., and deal with issues when we find them. Anyway,
>>> just my 0.2c...
>> +1 In my POV better to continue with old process and address any
>> issues once they occur.
>>
>> Thanks !
>>>
>>> --
>>> Luciano Resende
>>> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
>>> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
>>> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>>
>>

Re: GSoC Mentor vetting procedure

[Ulrich Stärk <ul...@spielviel.de>]

I'm OK with that, I'm just recapitulating what we discussed after last year's incident. Assuming
lazy concensus. we'll invite pmc@a.o to begin applying as mentors in 72 hours, no changes to the
mentor vetting procedure.

Uli

On 18.03.2012 04:59, Sagara Gunathunga wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Tammo van Lessen <tv...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Ulrich,
>>>
>>> I applied as mentor for Apache ODE and I'm the PMC chair of ODE. Does
>>> that mean I have to ACK (or not NACK) myself? Or do I need to let the
>>> others PMC members vote for me mentoring a project? Sounds a bit
>>> cumbersome to me.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>  Tammo
>>>
>> I agree with Tammo. The old process has been working ok for several
>> years (with the exception of one incident last year).  I'd rather
>> continue with the process (and maybe avoid any temporary account
>> creation at apache)., and deal with issues when we find them. Anyway,
>> just my 0.2c...
> +1 In my POV better to continue with old process and address any
> issues once they occur.
>
> Thanks !
>>
>> --
>> Luciano Resende
>> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
>> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
>> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
>

Re: GSoC Mentor vetting procedure

[Sagara Gunathunga <sa...@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Tammo van Lessen <tv...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Ulrich,
>>
>> I applied as mentor for Apache ODE and I'm the PMC chair of ODE. Does
>> that mean I have to ACK (or not NACK) myself? Or do I need to let the
>> others PMC members vote for me mentoring a project? Sounds a bit
>> cumbersome to me.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>  Tammo
>>
>
> I agree with Tammo. The old process has been working ok for several
> years (with the exception of one incident last year).  I'd rather
> continue with the process (and maybe avoid any temporary account
> creation at apache)., and deal with issues when we find them. Anyway,
> just my 0.2c...

+1 In my POV better to continue with old process and address any
issues once they occur.

Thanks !
>
>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/



-- 
Sagara Gunathunga

Blog      - http://ssagara.blogspot.com
Web      - http://people.apache.org/~sagara/
LinkedIn - http://www.linkedin.com/in/ssagara

Re: GSoC Mentor vetting procedure

[Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>]

On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Tammo van Lessen <tv...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Ulrich,
>
> I applied as mentor for Apache ODE and I'm the PMC chair of ODE. Does
> that mean I have to ACK (or not NACK) myself? Or do I need to let the
> others PMC members vote for me mentoring a project? Sounds a bit
> cumbersome to me.
>
> Cheers,
>  Tammo
>

I agree with Tammo. The old process has been working ok for several
years (with the exception of one incident last year).  I'd rather
continue with the process (and maybe avoid any temporary account
creation at apache)., and deal with issues when we find them. Anyway,
just my 0.2c...


-- 
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/

Re: GSoC Mentor vetting procedure

[Tammo van Lessen <tv...@gmail.com>]

Hi Ulrich,

I applied as mentor for Apache ODE and I'm the PMC chair of ODE. Does
that mean I have to ACK (or not NACK) myself? Or do I need to let the
others PMC members vote for me mentoring a project? Sounds a bit
cumbersome to me.

Cheers,
  Tammo

On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 22:50, Ulrich Stärk <ul...@spielviel.de> wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I just want to shortly recap the results of our discussions from last year: We want individual PMCs
> to be more involved in the mentor selection process and want them to lazy ACK mentors for their
> projects. So a potential mentor will need to 1) request to be a mentor in google melange and 2) send
> an email to code-awards@ and their individual private@<project>.a.o asking to be a mentor for
> <project>. If we don't hear a NACK from <project> within 72 hours, we make that person a mentor.
> Correct?
>
> Uli



-- 
Tammo van Lessen - http://www.taval.de

Re: GSoC Mentor vetting procedure

[Ulrich Stärk <ul...@spielviel.de>]

Am Mo, 19.03.2012, 22:31 schrieb Nóirín Pluincéid:
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> And for Podlings?  Do this in their own dev list, where mentors can be
>> counted on to raise any issues?  Or send them all to the IPMC general
>> list?
>
> I think an ACK from the PPMC is more meaningful in that case.
>
> N
>

+1

Re: GSoC Mentor vetting procedure

[Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>]

+1for PPMC

Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Mar 19, 2012 9:32 PM, "Nóirín Pluincéid" <no...@apache.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > And for Podlings?  Do this in their own dev list, where mentors can be
> > counted on to raise any issues?  Or send them all to the IPMC general
> > list?
>
> I think an ACK from the PPMC is more meaningful in that case.
>
> N
>

Re: GSoC Mentor vetting procedure

[Nóirín Pluincéid <no...@apache.org>]

On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> And for Podlings?  Do this in their own dev list, where mentors can be
> counted on to raise any issues?  Or send them all to the IPMC general
> list?

I think an ACK from the PPMC is more meaningful in that case.

N

Re: GSoC Mentor vetting procedure

[Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>]

On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Ulrich Stärk <ul...@spielviel.de> wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I just want to shortly recap the results of our discussions from last year: We want individual PMCs
> to be more involved in the mentor selection process and want them to lazy ACK mentors for their
> projects. So a potential mentor will need to 1) request to be a mentor in google melange and 2) send
> an email to code-awards@ and their individual private@<project>.a.o asking to be a mentor for
> <project>. If we don't hear a NACK from <project> within 72 hours, we make that person a mentor.
> Correct?
>

And for Podlings?  Do this in their own dev list, where mentors can be
counted on to raise any issues?  Or send them all to the IPMC general
list?

-Rob

> Uli