You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@community.apache.org by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com> on 2013/04/01 11:58:34 UTC
Process, policy and best practice
ComDev PMC,
I proposed, during budget discussions, that the ComDev PMC should consider
budgeting to accelerate the documentation goals of this PMC.
Since then the IPMC has been discussing the idea of handing off the
documentation parts of their responsibilities to ComDev. This is just a
discussion item and is in no way a decision at this point.
The idea, as I understand it, is not to pass over any of the podling
oversight responsibilities, only the documentation of ASF policies,
processes and best practice.
I stress, this is just an IPMC discussion, there is certainly no decision
at this point, at this point, but it is one that ComDev should be aware of.
Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
Yeah, I think so. Sounds like quite a promising idea.
On 1 April 2013 22:20, Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 4/1/2013 2:19 PM, Luciano Resende wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Ross Gardler <rgardler@opendirective.com
>> >**wrote:
>>
>>> On 1 Apr 2013 18:28, "Luciano Resende" <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:58 AM, Ross Gardler <
>>>> rgardler@opendirective.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>> ...
>
> Since then the IPMC has been discussing the idea of handing off the
>>>>> documentation parts of their responsibilities to ComDev. This is just a
>>>>> discussion item and is in no way a decision at this point.
>>>>>
>>>>> The idea, as I understand it, is not to pass over any of the podling
>>>>> oversight responsibilities, only the documentation of ASF policies,
>>>>> processes and best practice.
>>>>>
>>>> ...
>
> If the budget is not a pre-requisite, how do envision a small PMC like
>> ComDev, taking responsibility of a big task, that the current owner and a
>> much larger PMC has not been able to handle ?
>>
>
> Luciano has an excellent point in that there's not much to discuss until
> ComDev sees some clarity on what is being asked.
>
> I do however think this could be an excellent idea, precisely in part
> because ComDev is smaller and more focused. I could imagine ComDev
> changing it's scope to effectively serve as an information shepherd on all
> of the apache.org/* content focused on our technical communities. I.e.
> not only serving as owners of community.a.o, where we have friendly
> overviews and pointers to other info, but also editorial owners of things
> like /dev. This doesn't mean setting policy for technical matters or svn
> instructions - this more would mean (I'm imagining) taking responsibility
> for making the technical information there more understandable and better
> organized.
>
> The issue with the IPMC and the Incubator is multi-fold:
>
> - Operations. Overseeing podlings and voting in new ones, graduating
> ones, etc. This is *not* anything to do with ComDev.
>
> - Policy setting. This is the IPMC (or other relevant ASF officers)
> setting official minimum required policy for the incubation process. This
> is *not* anything to do with ComDev.
>
> - Explaining to the world what the Incubation policies are and guiding
> newcomers through how IPMC Operations work. This one bit is something that
> ComDev *might* be able to help with, if I'm seeing what Ross is getting at.
>
> Personally, I find the incubator site maddening in terms of explaining to
> a normal human what the heck to do. There's a chance that if ComDev wanted
> to help, people here could make significant improvements merely by better
> explaining the incubator - without having to make policy or podling
> decisions.
>
> That in particular is something that could make use of a hired technical
> writer, if separately we thought that spending was warranted.
>
> Make sense?
>
> - Shane
>
--
NS
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 5:56 PM, Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org> wrote:
> On 4/1/2013 6:28 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>
>> As I see it, the primary attraction here is that we could end up with
>> *one* coherent body of documentation on policies and procedures,
>> available to project new and old.
>>
>
> Oh, drat. I was really starting to get excited about this project -
> having one set of documentation that explains to normal humans how we work
> would be amazingly cool!
>
> Then I realized what the date is, and now I know that this must really be
> some complex April Fool's hoax.
>
> - Shane
>
>
LOL, Good one Shane :)
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 5:56 PM, Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org> wrote:
> On 4/1/2013 6:28 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>
>> As I see it, the primary attraction here is that we could end up with
>> *one* coherent body of documentation on policies and procedures,
>> available to project new and old.
>>
>
> Oh, drat. I was really starting to get excited about this project -
> having one set of documentation that explains to normal humans how we work
> would be amazingly cool!
>
> Then I realized what the date is, and now I know that this must really be
> some complex April Fool's hoax.
>
> - Shane
>
>
LOL, Good one Shane :)
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org>.
On 4/1/2013 6:28 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> As I see it, the primary attraction here is that we could end up with
> *one* coherent body of documentation on policies and procedures,
> available to project new and old.
Oh, drat. I was really starting to get excited about this project -
having one set of documentation that explains to normal humans how we
work would be amazingly cool!
Then I realized what the date is, and now I know that this must really
be some complex April Fool's hoax.
- Shane
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
On Apr 1, 2013, at 6:28 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> As I see it, the primary attraction here is that we could end up with
> *one* coherent body of documentation on policies and procedures,
> available to project new and old.
For whatever it's worth, I'd like to participate in such an effort in whatever role would be useful. I've written a thing or two, and can also assist in arranging already-written content into coherent shapes.
You know, assuming Shane was mistaken. ;-)
--
Rich Bowen
rbowen@rcbowen.com :: @rbowen
rbowen@apache.org
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org>.
On 4/1/2013 6:28 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> As I see it, the primary attraction here is that we could end up with
> *one* coherent body of documentation on policies and procedures,
> available to project new and old.
Oh, drat. I was really starting to get excited about this project -
having one set of documentation that explains to normal humans how we
work would be amazingly cool!
Then I realized what the date is, and now I know that this must really
be some complex April Fool's hoax.
- Shane
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
On Apr 1, 2013, at 6:28 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> As I see it, the primary attraction here is that we could end up with
> *one* coherent body of documentation on policies and procedures,
> available to project new and old.
For whatever it's worth, I'd like to participate in such an effort in whatever role would be useful. I've written a thing or two, and can also assist in arranging already-written content into coherent shapes.
You know, assuming Shane was mistaken. ;-)
--
Rich Bowen
rbowen@rcbowen.com :: @rbowen
rbowen@apache.org
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>.
As I see it, the primary attraction here is that we could end up with
*one* coherent body of documentation on policies and procedures,
available to project new and old.
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com>.
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
> The role of ComDev would not be to define policy, only to document and
> curate it. As Greg said when this first came up over a year ago - most of
> the actual writing is done.
There is no single source of policy for ComDev to document and curate -- there
are many conflicting interpretations of policy which are continually
relitigated year after year.
Consider what it took to assemble the licensing how-to at
<http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html>. There was a fair amount of
debate once we had a draft (see LEGAL-155), but that's the tip of the iceberg
-- the real work was developing a sophisticated enough understanding of a
difficult issue to write up a draft which was inoculated against all major
objections and could withstand the review phase.
I expect that refining
<http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html> will be a
similarly challenging undertaking.
I don't see how what needs to be done can be achieved by anybody other than
volunteers with significant expertise and patience.
Marvin Humphrey
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>.
As I see it, the primary attraction here is that we could end up with
*one* coherent body of documentation on policies and procedures,
available to project new and old.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com>.
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
> The role of ComDev would not be to define policy, only to document and
> curate it. As Greg said when this first came up over a year ago - most of
> the actual writing is done.
There is no single source of policy for ComDev to document and curate -- there
are many conflicting interpretations of policy which are continually
relitigated year after year.
Consider what it took to assemble the licensing how-to at
<http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html>. There was a fair amount of
debate once we had a draft (see LEGAL-155), but that's the tip of the iceberg
-- the real work was developing a sophisticated enough understanding of a
difficult issue to write up a draft which was inoculated against all major
objections and could withstand the review phase.
I expect that refining
<http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html> will be a
similarly challenging undertaking.
I don't see how what needs to be done can be achieved by anybody other than
volunteers with significant expertise and patience.
Marvin Humphrey
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
On 1 April 2013 22:20, Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 4/1/2013 2:19 PM, Luciano Resende wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Ross Gardler <rgardler@opendirective.com
>> >**wrote:
>>
>>> On 1 Apr 2013 18:28, "Luciano Resende" <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:58 AM, Ross Gardler <
>>>> rgardler@opendirective.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>> ...
>
> Since then the IPMC has been discussing the idea of handing off the
>>>>> documentation parts of their responsibilities to ComDev. This is just a
>>>>> discussion item and is in no way a decision at this point.
>>>>>
>>>>> The idea, as I understand it, is not to pass over any of the podling
>>>>> oversight responsibilities, only the documentation of ASF policies,
>>>>> processes and best practice.
>>>>>
>>>> ...
>
> If the budget is not a pre-requisite, how do envision a small PMC like
>> ComDev, taking responsibility of a big task, that the current owner and a
>> much larger PMC has not been able to handle ?
>>
>
> Luciano has an excellent point in that there's not much to discuss until
> ComDev sees some clarity on what is being asked.
>
This came up about a year ago on the IPMC and I pushed back. At the time
people were calling for the IPMC to be disbanded. I brought the idea to
ComDev but made it clear that I was concerned it was simply moving the
problem. The ComDev PMC seemed happy to allow me to push back. I did,
however, commit to revisiting this if the IPMC got its house in order.
In many ways the IPMC has got its house in order. Podlings are graduating
and the oversight role of the IPMC is now well managed. It's for this
reason that I bring this up again.
I agree (mostly) with Shane's observations below. That doesn't mean it is
necessarily a good idea, but it does mean it is one worth looking at. I
also agree with Martijn who said:
"Because 150+ people tasked with oversight, documentation of processes and
procedures of podlings, TLPs and themselves, discussing different views of
the past, present and future might not be able to agree to anything, but a
small team tasked with just documenting process might get the job done
without too much bike shedding."
The role of ComDev would not be to define policy, only to document and
curate it. As Greg said when this first came up over a year ago - most of
the actual writing is done.
As to Luciano's question of whether this can be achieved without a budget,
I agree this is a really important question. A further question is whether
the ASF will see sufficient benefit from any such investment. That is a
question for the ComDev PMC to discuss with the Board if people see
sufficient value in taking on this role.
For now I would suggest we ask ourselves if moving such activity to ComDev
will provide any measurable benefit to the foundation. If there is benefit
then we should figure out how we can realise it.
Ross
>
> I do however think this could be an excellent idea, precisely in part
> because ComDev is smaller and more focused. I could imagine ComDev
> changing it's scope to effectively serve as an information shepherd on all
> of the apache.org/* content focused on our technical communities. I.e.
> not only serving as owners of community.a.o, where we have friendly
> overviews and pointers to other info, but also editorial owners of things
> like /dev. This doesn't mean setting policy for technical matters or svn
> instructions - this more would mean (I'm imagining) taking responsibility
> for making the technical information there more understandable and better
> organized.
>
> The issue with the IPMC and the Incubator is multi-fold:
>
> - Operations. Overseeing podlings and voting in new ones, graduating
> ones, etc. This is *not* anything to do with ComDev.
>
> - Policy setting. This is the IPMC (or other relevant ASF officers)
> setting official minimum required policy for the incubation process. This
> is *not* anything to do with ComDev.
>
> - Explaining to the world what the Incubation policies are and guiding
> newcomers through how IPMC Operations work. This one bit is something that
> ComDev *might* be able to help with, if I'm seeing what Ross is getting at.
>
> Personally, I find the incubator site maddening in terms of explaining to
> a normal human what the heck to do. There's a chance that if ComDev wanted
> to help, people here could make significant improvements merely by better
> explaining the incubator - without having to make policy or podling
> decisions.
>
> That in particular is something that could make use of a hired technical
> writer, if separately we thought that spending was warranted.
>
> Make sense?
>
> - Shane
>
--
Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
Programme Leader (Open Development)
OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
On 1 April 2013 22:20, Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 4/1/2013 2:19 PM, Luciano Resende wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Ross Gardler <rgardler@opendirective.com
>> >**wrote:
>>
>>> On 1 Apr 2013 18:28, "Luciano Resende" <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:58 AM, Ross Gardler <
>>>> rgardler@opendirective.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>> ...
>
> Since then the IPMC has been discussing the idea of handing off the
>>>>> documentation parts of their responsibilities to ComDev. This is just a
>>>>> discussion item and is in no way a decision at this point.
>>>>>
>>>>> The idea, as I understand it, is not to pass over any of the podling
>>>>> oversight responsibilities, only the documentation of ASF policies,
>>>>> processes and best practice.
>>>>>
>>>> ...
>
> If the budget is not a pre-requisite, how do envision a small PMC like
>> ComDev, taking responsibility of a big task, that the current owner and a
>> much larger PMC has not been able to handle ?
>>
>
> Luciano has an excellent point in that there's not much to discuss until
> ComDev sees some clarity on what is being asked.
>
This came up about a year ago on the IPMC and I pushed back. At the time
people were calling for the IPMC to be disbanded. I brought the idea to
ComDev but made it clear that I was concerned it was simply moving the
problem. The ComDev PMC seemed happy to allow me to push back. I did,
however, commit to revisiting this if the IPMC got its house in order.
In many ways the IPMC has got its house in order. Podlings are graduating
and the oversight role of the IPMC is now well managed. It's for this
reason that I bring this up again.
I agree (mostly) with Shane's observations below. That doesn't mean it is
necessarily a good idea, but it does mean it is one worth looking at. I
also agree with Martijn who said:
"Because 150+ people tasked with oversight, documentation of processes and
procedures of podlings, TLPs and themselves, discussing different views of
the past, present and future might not be able to agree to anything, but a
small team tasked with just documenting process might get the job done
without too much bike shedding."
The role of ComDev would not be to define policy, only to document and
curate it. As Greg said when this first came up over a year ago - most of
the actual writing is done.
As to Luciano's question of whether this can be achieved without a budget,
I agree this is a really important question. A further question is whether
the ASF will see sufficient benefit from any such investment. That is a
question for the ComDev PMC to discuss with the Board if people see
sufficient value in taking on this role.
For now I would suggest we ask ourselves if moving such activity to ComDev
will provide any measurable benefit to the foundation. If there is benefit
then we should figure out how we can realise it.
Ross
>
> I do however think this could be an excellent idea, precisely in part
> because ComDev is smaller and more focused. I could imagine ComDev
> changing it's scope to effectively serve as an information shepherd on all
> of the apache.org/* content focused on our technical communities. I.e.
> not only serving as owners of community.a.o, where we have friendly
> overviews and pointers to other info, but also editorial owners of things
> like /dev. This doesn't mean setting policy for technical matters or svn
> instructions - this more would mean (I'm imagining) taking responsibility
> for making the technical information there more understandable and better
> organized.
>
> The issue with the IPMC and the Incubator is multi-fold:
>
> - Operations. Overseeing podlings and voting in new ones, graduating
> ones, etc. This is *not* anything to do with ComDev.
>
> - Policy setting. This is the IPMC (or other relevant ASF officers)
> setting official minimum required policy for the incubation process. This
> is *not* anything to do with ComDev.
>
> - Explaining to the world what the Incubation policies are and guiding
> newcomers through how IPMC Operations work. This one bit is something that
> ComDev *might* be able to help with, if I'm seeing what Ross is getting at.
>
> Personally, I find the incubator site maddening in terms of explaining to
> a normal human what the heck to do. There's a chance that if ComDev wanted
> to help, people here could make significant improvements merely by better
> explaining the incubator - without having to make policy or podling
> decisions.
>
> That in particular is something that could make use of a hired technical
> writer, if separately we thought that spending was warranted.
>
> Make sense?
>
> - Shane
>
--
Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
Programme Leader (Open Development)
OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org>.
On 4/1/2013 2:19 PM, Luciano Resende wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>wrote:
>> On 1 Apr 2013 18:28, "Luciano Resende" <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:58 AM, Ross Gardler <rgardler@opendirective.com
>>> wrote:
...
>>>> Since then the IPMC has been discussing the idea of handing off the
>>>> documentation parts of their responsibilities to ComDev. This is just a
>>>> discussion item and is in no way a decision at this point.
>>>>
>>>> The idea, as I understand it, is not to pass over any of the podling
>>>> oversight responsibilities, only the documentation of ASF policies,
>>>> processes and best practice.
...
> If the budget is not a pre-requisite, how do envision a small PMC like
> ComDev, taking responsibility of a big task, that the current owner and a
> much larger PMC has not been able to handle ?
Luciano has an excellent point in that there's not much to discuss until
ComDev sees some clarity on what is being asked.
I do however think this could be an excellent idea, precisely in part
because ComDev is smaller and more focused. I could imagine ComDev
changing it's scope to effectively serve as an information shepherd on
all of the apache.org/* content focused on our technical communities.
I.e. not only serving as owners of community.a.o, where we have friendly
overviews and pointers to other info, but also editorial owners of
things like /dev. This doesn't mean setting policy for technical
matters or svn instructions - this more would mean (I'm imagining)
taking responsibility for making the technical information there more
understandable and better organized.
The issue with the IPMC and the Incubator is multi-fold:
- Operations. Overseeing podlings and voting in new ones, graduating
ones, etc. This is *not* anything to do with ComDev.
- Policy setting. This is the IPMC (or other relevant ASF officers)
setting official minimum required policy for the incubation process.
This is *not* anything to do with ComDev.
- Explaining to the world what the Incubation policies are and guiding
newcomers through how IPMC Operations work. This one bit is something
that ComDev *might* be able to help with, if I'm seeing what Ross is
getting at.
Personally, I find the incubator site maddening in terms of explaining
to a normal human what the heck to do. There's a chance that if ComDev
wanted to help, people here could make significant improvements merely
by better explaining the incubator - without having to make policy or
podling decisions.
That in particular is something that could make use of a hired technical
writer, if separately we thought that spending was warranted.
Make sense?
- Shane
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
ComDev could work to attract volunteers. I am sure there are more than a
few people on the Incubator dev@ list at the moment who might consider
moving over here to work on process and policy documentation...
On 1 April 2013 19:19, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Ross Gardler <rgardler@opendirective.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity
> > On 1 Apr 2013 18:28, "Luciano Resende" <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:58 AM, Ross Gardler <
> rgardler@opendirective.com
> > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > ComDev PMC,
> > > >
> > > > I proposed, during budget discussions, that the ComDev PMC should
> > consider
> > > > budgeting to accelerate the documentation goals of this PMC.
> > > >
> > > > Since then the IPMC has been discussing the idea of handing off the
> > > > documentation parts of their responsibilities to ComDev. This is
> just a
> > > > discussion item and is in no way a decision at this point.
> > > >
> > > > The idea, as I understand it, is not to pass over any of the podling
> > > > oversight responsibilities, only the documentation of ASF policies,
> > > > processes and best practice.
> > > >
> > > > I stress, this is just an IPMC discussion, there is certainly no
> > decision
> > > > at this point, at this point, but it is one that ComDev should be
> aware
> > of.
> > > >
> > > > Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Can you clarify if these discussions have a pre-requisite that the
> ComDev
> > > PMC have a budget and can hire someone to do this ?
> > >
> >
> > The two items are not directly connected in any way. I've made no comment
> > about whether ComDev would want to take this on and, so far, the
> discussion
> > is only between myself and a couple of IPMC members (on the general list)
> >
> > Ross
> >
> >
> If the budget is not a pre-requisite, how do envision a small PMC like
> ComDev, taking responsibility of a big task, that the current owner and a
> much larger PMC has not been able to handle ?
>
>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
--
NS
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
ComDev could work to attract volunteers. I am sure there are more than a
few people on the Incubator dev@ list at the moment who might consider
moving over here to work on process and policy documentation...
On 1 April 2013 19:19, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Ross Gardler <rgardler@opendirective.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity
> > On 1 Apr 2013 18:28, "Luciano Resende" <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:58 AM, Ross Gardler <
> rgardler@opendirective.com
> > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > ComDev PMC,
> > > >
> > > > I proposed, during budget discussions, that the ComDev PMC should
> > consider
> > > > budgeting to accelerate the documentation goals of this PMC.
> > > >
> > > > Since then the IPMC has been discussing the idea of handing off the
> > > > documentation parts of their responsibilities to ComDev. This is
> just a
> > > > discussion item and is in no way a decision at this point.
> > > >
> > > > The idea, as I understand it, is not to pass over any of the podling
> > > > oversight responsibilities, only the documentation of ASF policies,
> > > > processes and best practice.
> > > >
> > > > I stress, this is just an IPMC discussion, there is certainly no
> > decision
> > > > at this point, at this point, but it is one that ComDev should be
> aware
> > of.
> > > >
> > > > Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Can you clarify if these discussions have a pre-requisite that the
> ComDev
> > > PMC have a budget and can hire someone to do this ?
> > >
> >
> > The two items are not directly connected in any way. I've made no comment
> > about whether ComDev would want to take this on and, so far, the
> discussion
> > is only between myself and a couple of IPMC members (on the general list)
> >
> > Ross
> >
> >
> If the budget is not a pre-requisite, how do envision a small PMC like
> ComDev, taking responsibility of a big task, that the current owner and a
> much larger PMC has not been able to handle ?
>
>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
--
NS
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
Because 150+ people tasked with oversight, documentation of processes and
procedures of podlings, TLPs and themselves, discussing different views of
the past, present and future might not be able to agree to anything, but a
small team tasked with just documenting process might get the job done
without too much bike shedding.
Martijn
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Ross Gardler <rgardler@opendirective.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity
> > On 1 Apr 2013 18:28, "Luciano Resende" <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:58 AM, Ross Gardler <
> rgardler@opendirective.com
> > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > ComDev PMC,
> > > >
> > > > I proposed, during budget discussions, that the ComDev PMC should
> > consider
> > > > budgeting to accelerate the documentation goals of this PMC.
> > > >
> > > > Since then the IPMC has been discussing the idea of handing off the
> > > > documentation parts of their responsibilities to ComDev. This is
> just a
> > > > discussion item and is in no way a decision at this point.
> > > >
> > > > The idea, as I understand it, is not to pass over any of the podling
> > > > oversight responsibilities, only the documentation of ASF policies,
> > > > processes and best practice.
> > > >
> > > > I stress, this is just an IPMC discussion, there is certainly no
> > decision
> > > > at this point, at this point, but it is one that ComDev should be
> aware
> > of.
> > > >
> > > > Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Can you clarify if these discussions have a pre-requisite that the
> ComDev
> > > PMC have a budget and can hire someone to do this ?
> > >
> >
> > The two items are not directly connected in any way. I've made no comment
> > about whether ComDev would want to take this on and, so far, the
> discussion
> > is only between myself and a couple of IPMC members (on the general list)
> >
> > Ross
> >
> >
> If the budget is not a pre-requisite, how do envision a small PMC like
> ComDev, taking responsibility of a big task, that the current owner and a
> much larger PMC has not been able to handle ?
>
>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
--
Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>wrote:
> Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity
> On 1 Apr 2013 18:28, "Luciano Resende" <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:58 AM, Ross Gardler <rgardler@opendirective.com
> >wrote:
> >
> > > ComDev PMC,
> > >
> > > I proposed, during budget discussions, that the ComDev PMC should
> consider
> > > budgeting to accelerate the documentation goals of this PMC.
> > >
> > > Since then the IPMC has been discussing the idea of handing off the
> > > documentation parts of their responsibilities to ComDev. This is just a
> > > discussion item and is in no way a decision at this point.
> > >
> > > The idea, as I understand it, is not to pass over any of the podling
> > > oversight responsibilities, only the documentation of ASF policies,
> > > processes and best practice.
> > >
> > > I stress, this is just an IPMC discussion, there is certainly no
> decision
> > > at this point, at this point, but it is one that ComDev should be aware
> of.
> > >
> > > Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity
> > >
> >
> >
> > Can you clarify if these discussions have a pre-requisite that the ComDev
> > PMC have a budget and can hire someone to do this ?
> >
>
> The two items are not directly connected in any way. I've made no comment
> about whether ComDev would want to take this on and, so far, the discussion
> is only between myself and a couple of IPMC members (on the general list)
>
> Ross
>
>
If the budget is not a pre-requisite, how do envision a small PMC like
ComDev, taking responsibility of a big task, that the current owner and a
much larger PMC has not been able to handle ?
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>wrote:
> Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity
> On 1 Apr 2013 18:28, "Luciano Resende" <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:58 AM, Ross Gardler <rgardler@opendirective.com
> >wrote:
> >
> > > ComDev PMC,
> > >
> > > I proposed, during budget discussions, that the ComDev PMC should
> consider
> > > budgeting to accelerate the documentation goals of this PMC.
> > >
> > > Since then the IPMC has been discussing the idea of handing off the
> > > documentation parts of their responsibilities to ComDev. This is just a
> > > discussion item and is in no way a decision at this point.
> > >
> > > The idea, as I understand it, is not to pass over any of the podling
> > > oversight responsibilities, only the documentation of ASF policies,
> > > processes and best practice.
> > >
> > > I stress, this is just an IPMC discussion, there is certainly no
> decision
> > > at this point, at this point, but it is one that ComDev should be aware
> of.
> > >
> > > Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity
> > >
> >
> >
> > Can you clarify if these discussions have a pre-requisite that the ComDev
> > PMC have a budget and can hire someone to do this ?
> >
>
> The two items are not directly connected in any way. I've made no comment
> about whether ComDev would want to take this on and, so far, the discussion
> is only between myself and a couple of IPMC members (on the general list)
>
> Ross
>
>
If the budget is not a pre-requisite, how do envision a small PMC like
ComDev, taking responsibility of a big task, that the current owner and a
much larger PMC has not been able to handle ?
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity
On 1 Apr 2013 18:28, "Luciano Resende" <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:58 AM, Ross Gardler <rgardler@opendirective.com
>wrote:
>
> > ComDev PMC,
> >
> > I proposed, during budget discussions, that the ComDev PMC should
consider
> > budgeting to accelerate the documentation goals of this PMC.
> >
> > Since then the IPMC has been discussing the idea of handing off the
> > documentation parts of their responsibilities to ComDev. This is just a
> > discussion item and is in no way a decision at this point.
> >
> > The idea, as I understand it, is not to pass over any of the podling
> > oversight responsibilities, only the documentation of ASF policies,
> > processes and best practice.
> >
> > I stress, this is just an IPMC discussion, there is certainly no
decision
> > at this point, at this point, but it is one that ComDev should be aware
of.
> >
> > Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity
> >
>
>
> Can you clarify if these discussions have a pre-requisite that the ComDev
> PMC have a budget and can hire someone to do this ?
>
The two items are not directly connected in any way. I've made no comment
about whether ComDev would want to take this on and, so far, the discussion
is only between myself and a couple of IPMC members (on the general list)
Ross
> --
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity
On 1 Apr 2013 18:28, "Luciano Resende" <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:58 AM, Ross Gardler <rgardler@opendirective.com
>wrote:
>
> > ComDev PMC,
> >
> > I proposed, during budget discussions, that the ComDev PMC should
consider
> > budgeting to accelerate the documentation goals of this PMC.
> >
> > Since then the IPMC has been discussing the idea of handing off the
> > documentation parts of their responsibilities to ComDev. This is just a
> > discussion item and is in no way a decision at this point.
> >
> > The idea, as I understand it, is not to pass over any of the podling
> > oversight responsibilities, only the documentation of ASF policies,
> > processes and best practice.
> >
> > I stress, this is just an IPMC discussion, there is certainly no
decision
> > at this point, at this point, but it is one that ComDev should be aware
of.
> >
> > Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity
> >
>
>
> Can you clarify if these discussions have a pre-requisite that the ComDev
> PMC have a budget and can hire someone to do this ?
>
The two items are not directly connected in any way. I've made no comment
about whether ComDev would want to take this on and, so far, the discussion
is only between myself and a couple of IPMC members (on the general list)
Ross
> --
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:58 AM, Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>wrote:
> ComDev PMC,
>
> I proposed, during budget discussions, that the ComDev PMC should consider
> budgeting to accelerate the documentation goals of this PMC.
>
> Since then the IPMC has been discussing the idea of handing off the
> documentation parts of their responsibilities to ComDev. This is just a
> discussion item and is in no way a decision at this point.
>
> The idea, as I understand it, is not to pass over any of the podling
> oversight responsibilities, only the documentation of ASF policies,
> processes and best practice.
>
> I stress, this is just an IPMC discussion, there is certainly no decision
> at this point, at this point, but it is one that ComDev should be aware of.
>
> Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity
>
Can you clarify if these discussions have a pre-requisite that the ComDev
PMC have a budget and can hire someone to do this ?
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: Process, policy and best practice
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:58 AM, Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>wrote:
> ComDev PMC,
>
> I proposed, during budget discussions, that the ComDev PMC should consider
> budgeting to accelerate the documentation goals of this PMC.
>
> Since then the IPMC has been discussing the idea of handing off the
> documentation parts of their responsibilities to ComDev. This is just a
> discussion item and is in no way a decision at this point.
>
> The idea, as I understand it, is not to pass over any of the podling
> oversight responsibilities, only the documentation of ASF policies,
> processes and best practice.
>
> I stress, this is just an IPMC discussion, there is certainly no decision
> at this point, at this point, but it is one that ComDev should be aware of.
>
> Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity
>
Can you clarify if these discussions have a pre-requisite that the ComDev
PMC have a budget and can hire someone to do this ?
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/