You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> on 2012/12/17 03:36:40 UTC
More and better report nagging
I see how I could arrange for Marvin or someone like him to bug
podlings until they actually deliver a report if they are due in the
cycle.
To enable this, I'll add a
[ ] Add an X between the brackets when the report is complete.
to the template.
This could be taken to gentle reminders to individual mentors.
Would anyone find this sort of thing objectionable?
Now that I've figured out the MoinMoin XMLRPC api, I am positively dangerous.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: More and better report nagging
Posted by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 8:23 PM, Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 7:48 PM, Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> FWIW, I feel the same. I'd rather see 'did not report' and let the
>>>> IPMC look for that pattern. Maybe just have your template generator
>>>> default to DNR in the text?
>>>
>>> +1 on defaulting to DNR.
>>>
>>> How about sending out the whole Incubator report to all podling dev lists,
>>> every month? That way the DNR shows up without an IPMC member having to
>>> notice and take action. But in addition, it increases podling exposure to
>>> other projects and to the ASF at large.
>>>
>>> An alternative is to send it out to only the podlings that are reporting for a
>>> cycle, but that's more work and doesn't serve the purpose of connecting the
>>> podling to being in the Incubator quite so cleanly.
>>
>>
>> I feel all that we are all volunteers, that podlings are volunteers
>> who don't necessarily have their organizational act together, and that
>> calling them out for DNR is not a very effective technique to
>> providing the supervision that we, as a PMC, are on the hook for. So
>> I'm inclined for now to nag, and to spend a few minutes making that
>> job less labor-intensive.
>
> I'm beginning to think your mind's made up and the original question
> was a pleasantry, but in case not...
At this point I'm cogitating.
>
> I hold a different view of things. While I think that we, ok you, are
> on the hook for a board report, we've (PMC) delegated[1] the reporting
> of each podling to the mentors that we approved for that podling. We
> aren't "calling out the podling" as DNR - we're calling out their
> mentor as DNR. If there's additional nags to go out, I'd do my
> "default to DNR" and send the nag to the mentors directly.
>
> Ultimately, making that job less labor-intensive involves getting
> mentors and would-be-mentors to realize they can't simply go around
> spewing their seeds as absentee fathers - it's a real commitment; to
> the podling and to the foundation. Shucks, keeping a record of
> deadbeat mentors would prolly help...
>
> In the end though, you've a thankless and tough job, so consider these
> as constructive thoughts to be readily ignored in favor of whatever it
> takes to get your job done:)
>
> Thanks,
> --tim
>
> [1] - http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Roles_and_Responsibilities.html#Mentor
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: More and better report nagging
Posted by Upayavira <uv...@odoko.co.uk>.
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012, at 11:39 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 5:21 AM, Upayavira <uv...@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
> > Personally, I'm not against nagging. Actually, when I'm on the receiving
> > end, I usually appreciate it, as timeliness is not a quality I am widely
> > praised for.
> >
> > Some podlings are in a position that is different from TLPs - they are
> > new to the whole thing, and may therefore require a little more help
> > than we would expect a TLP to need in remembering their
> > responsibilities. However, if I were needing to nag a podling that is
> > otherwise near graduation, I'd perhaps be worried.
> >
> > The DNR marker is still important though, and we should be sure that we
> > don't 'over-nag'. We encourage (more earlier in the process of
> > incubation, less later) and if after a few nags they don't do it, then
> > DNR is just fine.
>
>
> I want, at least, a *quick* way to find out how many DNR's are
> pending, and be able to make informed decisions about nagging. So I
> plan to go ahead with the template that allows a tool to tell who is
> missing.
Seems reasonable to me.
Upayavira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: More and better report nagging
Posted by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 5:21 AM, Upayavira <uv...@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
> Personally, I'm not against nagging. Actually, when I'm on the receiving
> end, I usually appreciate it, as timeliness is not a quality I am widely
> praised for.
>
> Some podlings are in a position that is different from TLPs - they are
> new to the whole thing, and may therefore require a little more help
> than we would expect a TLP to need in remembering their
> responsibilities. However, if I were needing to nag a podling that is
> otherwise near graduation, I'd perhaps be worried.
>
> The DNR marker is still important though, and we should be sure that we
> don't 'over-nag'. We encourage (more earlier in the process of
> incubation, less later) and if after a few nags they don't do it, then
> DNR is just fine.
I want, at least, a *quick* way to find out how many DNR's are
pending, and be able to make informed decisions about nagging. So I
plan to go ahead with the template that allows a tool to tell who is
missing.
>
> Upayavira
>
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012, at 09:04 AM, David Crossley wrote:
>> Tim Williams wrote:
>> > On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 7:48 PM, Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com> wrote:
>> > >> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >>> FWIW, I feel the same. I'd rather see 'did not report' and let the
>> > >>> IPMC look for that pattern. Maybe just have your template generator
>> > >>> default to DNR in the text?
>> > >>
>> > >> +1 on defaulting to DNR.
>> > >>
>> > >> How about sending out the whole Incubator report to all podling dev lists,
>> > >> every month? That way the DNR shows up without an IPMC member having to
>> > >> notice and take action. But in addition, it increases podling exposure to
>> > >> other projects and to the ASF at large.
>> > >>
>> > >> An alternative is to send it out to only the podlings that are reporting for a
>> > >> cycle, but that's more work and doesn't serve the purpose of connecting the
>> > >> podling to being in the Incubator quite so cleanly.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > I feel all that we are all volunteers, that podlings are volunteers
>> > > who don't necessarily have their organizational act together, and that
>> > > calling them out for DNR is not a very effective technique to
>> > > providing the supervision that we, as a PMC, are on the hook for. So
>> > > I'm inclined for now to nag, and to spend a few minutes making that
>> > > job less labor-intensive.
>> >
>> > I'm beginning to think your mind's made up and the original question
>> > was a pleasantry, but in case not...
>> >
>> > I hold a different view of things. While I think that we, ok you, are
>> > on the hook for a board report, we've (PMC) delegated[1] the reporting
>> > of each podling to the mentors that we approved for that podling. We
>> > aren't "calling out the podling" as DNR - we're calling out their
>> > mentor as DNR. If there's additional nags to go out, I'd do my
>> > "default to DNR" and send the nag to the mentors directly.
>> >
>> > Ultimately, making that job less labor-intensive involves getting
>> > mentors and would-be-mentors to realize they can't simply go around
>> > spewing their seeds as absentee fathers - it's a real commitment; to
>> > the podling and to the foundation. Shucks, keeping a record of
>> > deadbeat mentors would prolly help...
>> >
>> > In the end though, you've a thankless and tough job, so consider these
>> > as constructive thoughts to be readily ignored in favor of whatever it
>> > takes to get your job done:)
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > --tim
>> >
>> > [1] - http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Roles_and_Responsibilities.html#Mentor
>>
>> Things should be in their hands as much as possible.
>>
>> In my opinion each podling group of developers should be
>> ensuring that their board report is ready, with the mentors
>> just mentoring and making sure that actual status does get
>> reported.
>>
>> I wonder if we could utilise the podling metadata system
>> at content/podlings.xml
>> to get a podling PPMC member or a mentor to set an attribute
>> to mark that the report is received. Put the PPMC in the loop.
>>
>> This gets them used to overseeing their own project, being
>> self-reliant, and maintaining their own records.
>>
>> Another benefit of editing that file is that they see when
>> their next report is due and whether their metadata needs
>> to be updated.
>>
>> Any nag to them could encourage them to visit that file.
>>
>> -David
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: More and better report nagging
Posted by Upayavira <uv...@odoko.co.uk>.
Personally, I'm not against nagging. Actually, when I'm on the receiving
end, I usually appreciate it, as timeliness is not a quality I am widely
praised for.
Some podlings are in a position that is different from TLPs - they are
new to the whole thing, and may therefore require a little more help
than we would expect a TLP to need in remembering their
responsibilities. However, if I were needing to nag a podling that is
otherwise near graduation, I'd perhaps be worried.
The DNR marker is still important though, and we should be sure that we
don't 'over-nag'. We encourage (more earlier in the process of
incubation, less later) and if after a few nags they don't do it, then
DNR is just fine.
Upayavira
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012, at 09:04 AM, David Crossley wrote:
> Tim Williams wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 7:48 PM, Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com> wrote:
> > >> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> FWIW, I feel the same. I'd rather see 'did not report' and let the
> > >>> IPMC look for that pattern. Maybe just have your template generator
> > >>> default to DNR in the text?
> > >>
> > >> +1 on defaulting to DNR.
> > >>
> > >> How about sending out the whole Incubator report to all podling dev lists,
> > >> every month? That way the DNR shows up without an IPMC member having to
> > >> notice and take action. But in addition, it increases podling exposure to
> > >> other projects and to the ASF at large.
> > >>
> > >> An alternative is to send it out to only the podlings that are reporting for a
> > >> cycle, but that's more work and doesn't serve the purpose of connecting the
> > >> podling to being in the Incubator quite so cleanly.
> > >
> > >
> > > I feel all that we are all volunteers, that podlings are volunteers
> > > who don't necessarily have their organizational act together, and that
> > > calling them out for DNR is not a very effective technique to
> > > providing the supervision that we, as a PMC, are on the hook for. So
> > > I'm inclined for now to nag, and to spend a few minutes making that
> > > job less labor-intensive.
> >
> > I'm beginning to think your mind's made up and the original question
> > was a pleasantry, but in case not...
> >
> > I hold a different view of things. While I think that we, ok you, are
> > on the hook for a board report, we've (PMC) delegated[1] the reporting
> > of each podling to the mentors that we approved for that podling. We
> > aren't "calling out the podling" as DNR - we're calling out their
> > mentor as DNR. If there's additional nags to go out, I'd do my
> > "default to DNR" and send the nag to the mentors directly.
> >
> > Ultimately, making that job less labor-intensive involves getting
> > mentors and would-be-mentors to realize they can't simply go around
> > spewing their seeds as absentee fathers - it's a real commitment; to
> > the podling and to the foundation. Shucks, keeping a record of
> > deadbeat mentors would prolly help...
> >
> > In the end though, you've a thankless and tough job, so consider these
> > as constructive thoughts to be readily ignored in favor of whatever it
> > takes to get your job done:)
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --tim
> >
> > [1] - http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Roles_and_Responsibilities.html#Mentor
>
> Things should be in their hands as much as possible.
>
> In my opinion each podling group of developers should be
> ensuring that their board report is ready, with the mentors
> just mentoring and making sure that actual status does get
> reported.
>
> I wonder if we could utilise the podling metadata system
> at content/podlings.xml
> to get a podling PPMC member or a mentor to set an attribute
> to mark that the report is received. Put the PPMC in the loop.
>
> This gets them used to overseeing their own project, being
> self-reliant, and maintaining their own records.
>
> Another benefit of editing that file is that they see when
> their next report is due and whether their metadata needs
> to be updated.
>
> Any nag to them could encourage them to visit that file.
>
> -David
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: More and better report nagging
Posted by David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>.
Tim Williams wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 7:48 PM, Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> FWIW, I feel the same. I'd rather see 'did not report' and let the
> >>> IPMC look for that pattern. Maybe just have your template generator
> >>> default to DNR in the text?
> >>
> >> +1 on defaulting to DNR.
> >>
> >> How about sending out the whole Incubator report to all podling dev lists,
> >> every month? That way the DNR shows up without an IPMC member having to
> >> notice and take action. But in addition, it increases podling exposure to
> >> other projects and to the ASF at large.
> >>
> >> An alternative is to send it out to only the podlings that are reporting for a
> >> cycle, but that's more work and doesn't serve the purpose of connecting the
> >> podling to being in the Incubator quite so cleanly.
> >
> >
> > I feel all that we are all volunteers, that podlings are volunteers
> > who don't necessarily have their organizational act together, and that
> > calling them out for DNR is not a very effective technique to
> > providing the supervision that we, as a PMC, are on the hook for. So
> > I'm inclined for now to nag, and to spend a few minutes making that
> > job less labor-intensive.
>
> I'm beginning to think your mind's made up and the original question
> was a pleasantry, but in case not...
>
> I hold a different view of things. While I think that we, ok you, are
> on the hook for a board report, we've (PMC) delegated[1] the reporting
> of each podling to the mentors that we approved for that podling. We
> aren't "calling out the podling" as DNR - we're calling out their
> mentor as DNR. If there's additional nags to go out, I'd do my
> "default to DNR" and send the nag to the mentors directly.
>
> Ultimately, making that job less labor-intensive involves getting
> mentors and would-be-mentors to realize they can't simply go around
> spewing their seeds as absentee fathers - it's a real commitment; to
> the podling and to the foundation. Shucks, keeping a record of
> deadbeat mentors would prolly help...
>
> In the end though, you've a thankless and tough job, so consider these
> as constructive thoughts to be readily ignored in favor of whatever it
> takes to get your job done:)
>
> Thanks,
> --tim
>
> [1] - http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Roles_and_Responsibilities.html#Mentor
Things should be in their hands as much as possible.
In my opinion each podling group of developers should be
ensuring that their board report is ready, with the mentors
just mentoring and making sure that actual status does get
reported.
I wonder if we could utilise the podling metadata system
at content/podlings.xml
to get a podling PPMC member or a mentor to set an attribute
to mark that the report is received. Put the PPMC in the loop.
This gets them used to overseeing their own project, being
self-reliant, and maintaining their own records.
Another benefit of editing that file is that they see when
their next report is due and whether their metadata needs
to be updated.
Any nag to them could encourage them to visit that file.
-David
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: More and better report nagging
Posted by Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 7:48 PM, Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> FWIW, I feel the same. I'd rather see 'did not report' and let the
>>> IPMC look for that pattern. Maybe just have your template generator
>>> default to DNR in the text?
>>
>> +1 on defaulting to DNR.
>>
>> How about sending out the whole Incubator report to all podling dev lists,
>> every month? That way the DNR shows up without an IPMC member having to
>> notice and take action. But in addition, it increases podling exposure to
>> other projects and to the ASF at large.
>>
>> An alternative is to send it out to only the podlings that are reporting for a
>> cycle, but that's more work and doesn't serve the purpose of connecting the
>> podling to being in the Incubator quite so cleanly.
>
>
> I feel all that we are all volunteers, that podlings are volunteers
> who don't necessarily have their organizational act together, and that
> calling them out for DNR is not a very effective technique to
> providing the supervision that we, as a PMC, are on the hook for. So
> I'm inclined for now to nag, and to spend a few minutes making that
> job less labor-intensive.
I'm beginning to think your mind's made up and the original question
was a pleasantry, but in case not...
I hold a different view of things. While I think that we, ok you, are
on the hook for a board report, we've (PMC) delegated[1] the reporting
of each podling to the mentors that we approved for that podling. We
aren't "calling out the podling" as DNR - we're calling out their
mentor as DNR. If there's additional nags to go out, I'd do my
"default to DNR" and send the nag to the mentors directly.
Ultimately, making that job less labor-intensive involves getting
mentors and would-be-mentors to realize they can't simply go around
spewing their seeds as absentee fathers - it's a real commitment; to
the podling and to the foundation. Shucks, keeping a record of
deadbeat mentors would prolly help...
In the end though, you've a thankless and tough job, so consider these
as constructive thoughts to be readily ignored in favor of whatever it
takes to get your job done:)
Thanks,
--tim
[1] - http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Roles_and_Responsibilities.html#Mentor
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: More and better report nagging
Posted by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> FWIW, I feel the same. I'd rather see 'did not report' and let the
>> IPMC look for that pattern. Maybe just have your template generator
>> default to DNR in the text?
>
> +1 on defaulting to DNR.
>
> How about sending out the whole Incubator report to all podling dev lists,
> every month? That way the DNR shows up without an IPMC member having to
> notice and take action. But in addition, it increases podling exposure to
> other projects and to the ASF at large.
>
> An alternative is to send it out to only the podlings that are reporting for a
> cycle, but that's more work and doesn't serve the purpose of connecting the
> podling to being in the Incubator quite so cleanly.
I feel all that we are all volunteers, that podlings are volunteers
who don't necessarily have their organizational act together, and that
calling them out for DNR is not a very effective technique to
providing the supervision that we, as a PMC, are on the hook for. So
I'm inclined for now to nag, and to spend a few minutes making that
job less labor-intensive.
>
> Marvin Humphrey
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: More and better report nagging
Posted by Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com>.
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> FWIW, I feel the same. I'd rather see 'did not report' and let the
> IPMC look for that pattern. Maybe just have your template generator
> default to DNR in the text?
+1 on defaulting to DNR.
How about sending out the whole Incubator report to all podling dev lists,
every month? That way the DNR shows up without an IPMC member having to
notice and take action. But in addition, it increases podling exposure to
other projects and to the ASF at large.
An alternative is to send it out to only the podlings that are reporting for a
cycle, but that's more work and doesn't serve the purpose of connecting the
podling to being in the Incubator quite so cleanly.
Marvin Humphrey
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: More and better report nagging
Posted by Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 7:56 AM, Christian Grobmeier
<gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 5:54 AM, Christian Grobmeier
>> <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I really don't object, but when the podling has graduated, they don't
>>> have such a reminder.
>>>
>>> What I am trying to say: the podling gets an reminder. It should be
>>> possible to just write this report without nagging. If they don't do
>>> it, it's a signal that "something went wrong". Now if you nag,
>>> somebody would do it finally. But it would no longer reflect if people
>>> actually care on the project or just want to make these e-mails stop.
>>
>> Please have mercy upon me. I'm the chair. I'm responsible for a
>> complete report. I found it labor intensive to check for all the
>> reports, and to manually nag the laggards. If it makes you feel
>> better, you could view this as my personal tool to automate a task
>> that I have to do anyway.
>
> I have mercy. Do whatever you think fits best to you.
>
> In my opinion constant nagging is not necessary - "did not report"
> does the job as well as this line is a report as well; if a project
> constantly fails report to report its more a matter to retirement than
> to play kindergardener.
FWIW, I feel the same. I'd rather see 'did not report' and let the
IPMC look for that pattern. Maybe just have your template generator
default to DNR in the text?
--tim
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: More and better report nagging
Posted by Christian Grobmeier <gr...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 5:54 AM, Christian Grobmeier
> <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I really don't object, but when the podling has graduated, they don't
>> have such a reminder.
>>
>> What I am trying to say: the podling gets an reminder. It should be
>> possible to just write this report without nagging. If they don't do
>> it, it's a signal that "something went wrong". Now if you nag,
>> somebody would do it finally. But it would no longer reflect if people
>> actually care on the project or just want to make these e-mails stop.
>
> Please have mercy upon me. I'm the chair. I'm responsible for a
> complete report. I found it labor intensive to check for all the
> reports, and to manually nag the laggards. If it makes you feel
> better, you could view this as my personal tool to automate a task
> that I have to do anyway.
I have mercy. Do whatever you think fits best to you.
In my opinion constant nagging is not necessary - "did not report"
does the job as well as this line is a report as well; if a project
constantly fails report to report its more a matter to retirement than
to play kindergardener.
Again, I do not object. Just wanted to give a you my thoughts.
Cheers
>>
>> Of course, some Mentors nag when a report is not done. Finally it does
>> also reflect on the Mentors.
>>
>> That said, i am no opposed if somebody would enable that feature, but
>> on the other hand i think it is good as it is now.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Christian
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I see how I could arrange for Marvin or someone like him to bug
>>> podlings until they actually deliver a report if they are due in the
>>> cycle.
>>>
>>> To enable this, I'll add a
>>>
>>> [ ] Add an X between the brackets when the report is complete.
>>>
>>> to the template.
>>>
>>> This could be taken to gentle reminders to individual mentors.
>>>
>>> Would anyone find this sort of thing objectionable?
>>>
>>> Now that I've figured out the MoinMoin XMLRPC api, I am positively dangerous.
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> http://www.grobmeier.de
>> https://www.timeandbill.de
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
--
http://www.grobmeier.de
https://www.timeandbill.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: More and better report nagging
Posted by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 5:54 AM, Christian Grobmeier
<gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I really don't object, but when the podling has graduated, they don't
> have such a reminder.
>
> What I am trying to say: the podling gets an reminder. It should be
> possible to just write this report without nagging. If they don't do
> it, it's a signal that "something went wrong". Now if you nag,
> somebody would do it finally. But it would no longer reflect if people
> actually care on the project or just want to make these e-mails stop.
Please have mercy upon me. I'm the chair. I'm responsible for a
complete report. I found it labor intensive to check for all the
reports, and to manually nag the laggards. If it makes you feel
better, you could view this as my personal tool to automate a task
that I have to do anyway.
>
> Of course, some Mentors nag when a report is not done. Finally it does
> also reflect on the Mentors.
>
> That said, i am no opposed if somebody would enable that feature, but
> on the other hand i think it is good as it is now.
>
> Cheers
> Christian
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I see how I could arrange for Marvin or someone like him to bug
>> podlings until they actually deliver a report if they are due in the
>> cycle.
>>
>> To enable this, I'll add a
>>
>> [ ] Add an X between the brackets when the report is complete.
>>
>> to the template.
>>
>> This could be taken to gentle reminders to individual mentors.
>>
>> Would anyone find this sort of thing objectionable?
>>
>> Now that I've figured out the MoinMoin XMLRPC api, I am positively dangerous.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> http://www.grobmeier.de
> https://www.timeandbill.de
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: More and better report nagging
Posted by Christian Grobmeier <gr...@gmail.com>.
I really don't object, but when the podling has graduated, they don't
have such a reminder.
What I am trying to say: the podling gets an reminder. It should be
possible to just write this report without nagging. If they don't do
it, it's a signal that "something went wrong". Now if you nag,
somebody would do it finally. But it would no longer reflect if people
actually care on the project or just want to make these e-mails stop.
Of course, some Mentors nag when a report is not done. Finally it does
also reflect on the Mentors.
That said, i am no opposed if somebody would enable that feature, but
on the other hand i think it is good as it is now.
Cheers
Christian
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I see how I could arrange for Marvin or someone like him to bug
> podlings until they actually deliver a report if they are due in the
> cycle.
>
> To enable this, I'll add a
>
> [ ] Add an X between the brackets when the report is complete.
>
> to the template.
>
> This could be taken to gentle reminders to individual mentors.
>
> Would anyone find this sort of thing objectionable?
>
> Now that I've figured out the MoinMoin XMLRPC api, I am positively dangerous.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
--
http://www.grobmeier.de
https://www.timeandbill.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org