You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com> on 2012/05/02 10:53:49 UTC
Shepherds for podling reports
Hi,
In order to better share the effort of reviewing podling reports and
giving constructive feedback where needed, I'd like to propose
something like the shepherd model the ASF board is using for project
reports. For each report a single "shepherd" [*] is assigned
responsibility for a deeper review of the report and any followups
that may be needed. Of course anyone within the IPMC is still welcome
to help in the review, and in any case the mentors of a podling should
review and sign off on the reports of their podlings.
Any volunteer shepherds? Please sign up by adding your name to [1].
[1] http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IncubatorShepherds
[*] A shepherd watching over a podling... Perhaps someone has a better
agricultural term in mind? :-)
BR,
Jukka Zitting
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by "Franklin, Matthew B." <mf...@mitre.org>.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ross Gardler [mailto:rgardler@opendirective.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 8:09 AM
>To: general@incubator.apache.org
>Subject: Re: Shepherds for podling reports
>
>On 2 May 2012 12:50, Franklin, Matthew B. <mf...@mitre.org> wrote:
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Ross Gardler [mailto:rgardler@opendirective.com]
>
>...
>
>>>Looking a little further forward i.e. not suggesting this initial
>>>small step should be transformed into a larger step but rather looking
>>>at what the next small step might be...
>>>
>>>I'd like to revisit the idea of grouping projects, e.g. big data,
>>>content, semantic, social etc. I imagine that people willing to be
>>>Shepherds will also have specific areas of interest. I imagine that
>>>shepherds would get more value from their time, and projects would get
>>>more cross-community feedback, if try to match shepherds to projects.
>>>For example, as a mentor on Wookie I'm interested in the progress of,
>>>and potential for collaboration with, Wave. My interest isn't
>>>sufficiently strong for me to dive into the dev list, but I'd
>>>certainly be willing to help the IPMC and myself by Shepherding that
>>>projects reports periodically.
>>
>> The only (small) issue with bucketing podlings is what do we do when one
>fits in more than one category? I think the idea would be useful in general, so
>long as we clearly define the rules for cross-cutting projects (ie they exist in
>both, they choose one, etc)
>>
>
>I don't imagine the "bucketing" to be enshrined in written process, or
>even be fixed. More of a convenience. We might do it by, for example,
>asking Shepherds to identify the projects they would *prefer* to
>shepherd and why. To continue my example above I might say "I have an
>interest in any social related podling so I would prefer to shepherd
>Wave which is one such project I'm not a mentor on". Someone else
>might say "I'm really interested in communications protocols and so I
>will shepherd Wave".
Fair enough. I think that makes a lot of sense then.
>
>I'm not suggesting formality, just a semblance of structure. I think
>the best way to proceed is to get out list of shepherds, do a couple
>of months and then discuss whether this proposed next step will add
>anything to the process. My goal is to have more cross-community
>awareness in the incubator projects as I've observed that those
>projects that have someone actively seeking relationships tend to
>build critical mass sooner. My proposed approach is only one thing
>that might help in this regard.
>
>Ross
>
>Ross
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>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: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
I think it was me that was unclear. I was backtracking in the idea of
linking cross-community work to shepherds. I wasn't backtracking on the
idea of shepherds. Or, what you said ;-)
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On May 3, 2012 2:35 AM, "Greg Stein" <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>
> wrote:
> > Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
> > On May 2, 2012 5:57 PM, "Greg Stein" <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >...
> >> Stated interests, and cross-community awareness are at odds with each
> > other.
> >>
> >> The Board randomly assigns shepherds to the reports, *specifically* to
> >> ensure Directors get a wider view of the org, and to avoid falling into
> >> some kind of blinders/rut with reviewing the same project repeatedly.
> >>
> >
> > Hmmm... I see your point.
> >
> > Maybe this is the wrong place to do this. I do think there is value in
> the
> > long term plan as expressed during the incubator reboot discussions. But
> > you make a strong argument as to why the shepherds process is the wrong
> > place to hang this particular goal.
>
> Hrm. Maybe I wasn't clear: I completely support the notion of
> shepherds for podling reports. It provides more review for the
> Incubator PMC itself, in order to determine what it needs to do. Then
> it kicks the result up to the Board and starts to perform the Action
> Items that fell out of those reports.
>
> My concern was on the notion of "permanently" assigning a shepherd to
> one or more podlings, or some kind of "interest-based" assignment. For
> myself, I think it seems best to gather insights from "all corners" of
> the Incubator by getting something different to review each month.
>
> Cheers,
> -g
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
> Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
> On May 2, 2012 5:57 PM, "Greg Stein" <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>...
>> Stated interests, and cross-community awareness are at odds with each
> other.
>>
>> The Board randomly assigns shepherds to the reports, *specifically* to
>> ensure Directors get a wider view of the org, and to avoid falling into
>> some kind of blinders/rut with reviewing the same project repeatedly.
>>
>
> Hmmm... I see your point.
>
> Maybe this is the wrong place to do this. I do think there is value in the
> long term plan as expressed during the incubator reboot discussions. But
> you make a strong argument as to why the shepherds process is the wrong
> place to hang this particular goal.
Hrm. Maybe I wasn't clear: I completely support the notion of
shepherds for podling reports. It provides more review for the
Incubator PMC itself, in order to determine what it needs to do. Then
it kicks the result up to the Board and starts to perform the Action
Items that fell out of those reports.
My concern was on the notion of "permanently" assigning a shepherd to
one or more podlings, or some kind of "interest-based" assignment. For
myself, I think it seems best to gather insights from "all corners" of
the Incubator by getting something different to review each month.
Cheers,
-g
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On May 2, 2012 5:57 PM, "Greg Stein" <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On May 2, 2012 8:10 AM, "Ross Gardler" <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
> >...
> > I don't imagine the "bucketing" to be enshrined in written process, or
> > even be fixed. More of a convenience. We might do it by, for example,
> > asking Shepherds to identify the projects they would *prefer* to
> > shepherd and why. To continue my example above I might say "I have an
> > interest in any social related podling so I would prefer to shepherd
> > Wave which is one such project I'm not a mentor on". Someone else
> > might say "I'm really interested in communications protocols and so I
> > will shepherd Wave".
> >
> > I'm not suggesting formality, just a semblance of structure. I think
> > the best way to proceed is to get out list of shepherds, do a couple
> > of months and then discuss whether this proposed next step will add
> > anything to the process. My goal is to have more cross-community
> > awareness in the incubator projects as I've observed that those
> > projects that have someone actively seeking relationships tend to
> > build critical mass sooner. My proposed approach is only one thing
> > that might help in this regard.
>
> Stated interests, and cross-community awareness are at odds with each
other.
>
> The Board randomly assigns shepherds to the reports, *specifically* to
> ensure Directors get a wider view of the org, and to avoid falling into
> some kind of blinders/rut with reviewing the same project repeatedly.
>
Hmmm... I see your point.
Maybe this is the wrong place to do this. I do think there is value in the
long term plan as expressed during the incubator reboot discussions. But
you make a strong argument as to why the shepherds process is the wrong
place to hang this particular goal.
Ross
> (and no, I'm not volunteering; I read them all already, along with 40 more
> reports... :-P)
>
> Cheers,
> -g
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
On May 2, 2012 8:10 AM, "Ross Gardler" <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
>...
> I don't imagine the "bucketing" to be enshrined in written process, or
> even be fixed. More of a convenience. We might do it by, for example,
> asking Shepherds to identify the projects they would *prefer* to
> shepherd and why. To continue my example above I might say "I have an
> interest in any social related podling so I would prefer to shepherd
> Wave which is one such project I'm not a mentor on". Someone else
> might say "I'm really interested in communications protocols and so I
> will shepherd Wave".
>
> I'm not suggesting formality, just a semblance of structure. I think
> the best way to proceed is to get out list of shepherds, do a couple
> of months and then discuss whether this proposed next step will add
> anything to the process. My goal is to have more cross-community
> awareness in the incubator projects as I've observed that those
> projects that have someone actively seeking relationships tend to
> build critical mass sooner. My proposed approach is only one thing
> that might help in this regard.
Stated interests, and cross-community awareness are at odds with each other.
The Board randomly assigns shepherds to the reports, *specifically* to
ensure Directors get a wider view of the org, and to avoid falling into
some kind of blinders/rut with reviewing the same project repeatedly.
(and no, I'm not volunteering; I read them all already, along with 40 more
reports... :-P)
Cheers,
-g
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Mohammad Nour El-Din <no...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 8:27 PM, Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In the Board agenda, we have a line where each Director can state they have
> reviewed the report (before the meeting). They can also append queries and
> comments. Little mini-discussions kinda happen in those comments.
>
> Point here is: provide a similar location for IPMC members (including
> shepherds) to list their review/approval. There is no strict need to divvy
> the reviews. Jukka is doing that as a transitionary measure until people
> get into it.
>
> IOW, there is no big deal if both Mohammad and Dave review Nuvem and Wink.
> The real goal is at least one or more IPMC names associated with each
> podling report. (beyond mentor signoffs?)
>
> Another way to say it: Mohammad: go ahead and review all six. No big deal
> if there is overlap.
>
> (and if you believe six is a problem, then avoid becoming a Director; we
> review something like 40 to 50... month after month... :-P)
>
Well, I can start rehearsing with 6 reports preparing for the 40-50 ones :P
>
> It is this early review and signoff that is behind the need for receiving
> reports in advance of the meeting. The hope is that all reports have been
> reviewed by (all) the Directors beforehand, so we don't have to discuss
> them in detail during the meeting. We stop and discuss when a Director
> leaves a flag/query/concern in the report comments.
>
> Cheers,
> -g
> On May 4, 2012 12:35 PM, "Mohammad Nour El-Din" <no...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Jukka...
> >
> > I also added myself, but as being a Mentor of CloudStack I would rather
> > take (shepherdZ: DeltaSpike, Nuvem, Wink) while Dave Fisher takes
> > (shepherdY:
> > CloudStack, NPanday, VCL)
> >
> > Dave would you please ACK that ?
> >
> > On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitting@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:14 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>
> > > wrote:
> > > > This looks like a mind expanding activity. I added my name for a
> > maximum
> > > of 2 per month.
> > >
> > > Great, thanks!
> > >
> > > Would you mind taking a look at for example Nuvem and Wink this month?
> > > Or pick some other yet unclaimed reports.
> > >
> > > BR,
> > >
> > > Jukka Zitting
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thanks
> > - Mohammad Nour
> > ----
> > "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep
> moving"
> > - Albert Einstein
> >
>
--
Thanks
- Mohammad Nour
----
"Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving"
- Albert Einstein
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
> I've done my shepherd reviews and made one comment (about Amber) on
> this list). I'm not sure where you want general observations recording
> but I have moved the projects to the recommended status category
That's perfect, thanks!
I'll compose the report summary based on the comments people raise
about individual reports (like the one you did about Amber).
BR,
Jukka Zitting
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
Sorry for the delay. Something came up that took most of my attention
away from the Incubator for the last few days.
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 7:49 PM, Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, the Wiki page explicitly says that the chair will assign.
If you have time, feel free to pick any of the reports still listed
under TODOs. And as said, there's no harm (on the contrary) of
multiple reviews on top of those already done by the podling mentors.
I'll start working on completing the Incubator report later tonight.
Any extra podling reviews and especially the categorization of podling
status would be quite useful for that.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On May 8, 2012 6:50 PM, "Benson Margulies" <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Well, the Wiki page explicitly says that the chair will assign.
To make sure they are all covered by at least one person, yes. However, I'm
pretty sure doubling would be good - more eyes etc.
(For what its worth I'd be happy for you to give any of the projects I'm a
mentor or shepherd the once over. As my experience on Amber shows this
month mentors sometimes miss important stuff , extra eyes to compliment my
own are appreciated)
>
> On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > No such thing as "leftover". Doubling up (or more) is just fine.
> >
> > Q is whether there are some under-reviewed...
> > On May 8, 2012 6:40 AM, "Benson Margulies" <bi...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >
> >> I was late to volunteer. Do you have any leftover projects?
> >>
> >> On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Ross Gardler <
rgardler@opendirective.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > I've done my shepherd reviews and made one comment (about Amber) on
> >> > this list). I'm not sure where you want general observations
recording
> >> > but I have moved the projects to the recommended status category
> >> >
> >> > On 7 May 2012 21:03, William A. Rowe Jr. <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> >> >> On 5/4/2012 1:27 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> >> >>> In the Board agenda, we have a line where each Director can state
they
> >> have
> >> >>> reviewed the report (before the meeting). They can also append
queries
> >> and
> >> >>> comments. Little mini-discussions kinda happen in those comments.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Point here is: provide a similar location for IPMC members
(including
> >> >>> shepherds) to list their review/approval. There is no strict need
to
> >> divvy
> >> >>> the reviews. Jukka is doing that as a transitionary measure until
> >> people
> >> >>> get into it.
> >> >>
> >> >> The approach would require just a couple of things;
> >> >>
> >> >> * designate a private report-review.txt file svn path which
provides
> >> svn
> >> >> notification to the incubator-private list. Private, because both
> >> personal
> >> >> and confidential questions may be asked and answered in the scope
of
> >> that
> >> >> approval/question/comment review file.
> >> >>
> >> >> * populate that file each month with the list of reports. Those
> >> reports
> >> >> themselves could continue to persist in the wiki or could be
> >> transfered
> >> >> into that internal edit/discuss report file.
> >> >>
> >> >> A comment to that svn review file would be broadcast, so that
answers
> >> and the
> >> >> followup can either occur as a subsequent commit (asked and
answered),
> >> or can
> >> >> evolve into an incubator-private mail list dialog (or be referred
over
> >> to the
> >> >> podling-dev or podling-private list for clarification).
> >> >>
> >> >> In all I like the idea.
> >> >>
> >> >>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
> >> > Programme Leader (Open Development)
> >> > OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
> >> >
> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > 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: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>.
Well, the Wiki page explicitly says that the chair will assign.
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No such thing as "leftover". Doubling up (or more) is just fine.
>
> Q is whether there are some under-reviewed...
> On May 8, 2012 6:40 AM, "Benson Margulies" <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I was late to volunteer. Do you have any leftover projects?
>>
>> On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>
>> wrote:
>> > I've done my shepherd reviews and made one comment (about Amber) on
>> > this list). I'm not sure where you want general observations recording
>> > but I have moved the projects to the recommended status category
>> >
>> > On 7 May 2012 21:03, William A. Rowe Jr. <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>> >> On 5/4/2012 1:27 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> >>> In the Board agenda, we have a line where each Director can state they
>> have
>> >>> reviewed the report (before the meeting). They can also append queries
>> and
>> >>> comments. Little mini-discussions kinda happen in those comments.
>> >>>
>> >>> Point here is: provide a similar location for IPMC members (including
>> >>> shepherds) to list their review/approval. There is no strict need to
>> divvy
>> >>> the reviews. Jukka is doing that as a transitionary measure until
>> people
>> >>> get into it.
>> >>
>> >> The approach would require just a couple of things;
>> >>
>> >> * designate a private report-review.txt file svn path which provides
>> svn
>> >> notification to the incubator-private list. Private, because both
>> personal
>> >> and confidential questions may be asked and answered in the scope of
>> that
>> >> approval/question/comment review file.
>> >>
>> >> * populate that file each month with the list of reports. Those
>> reports
>> >> themselves could continue to persist in the wiki or could be
>> transfered
>> >> into that internal edit/discuss report file.
>> >>
>> >> A comment to that svn review file would be broadcast, so that answers
>> and the
>> >> followup can either occur as a subsequent commit (asked and answered),
>> or can
>> >> evolve into an incubator-private mail list dialog (or be referred over
>> to the
>> >> podling-dev or podling-private list for clarification).
>> >>
>> >> In all I like the idea.
>> >>
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
>> > Programme Leader (Open Development)
>> > OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > 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: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
No such thing as "leftover". Doubling up (or more) is just fine.
Q is whether there are some under-reviewed...
On May 8, 2012 6:40 AM, "Benson Margulies" <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I was late to volunteer. Do you have any leftover projects?
>
> On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>
> wrote:
> > I've done my shepherd reviews and made one comment (about Amber) on
> > this list). I'm not sure where you want general observations recording
> > but I have moved the projects to the recommended status category
> >
> > On 7 May 2012 21:03, William A. Rowe Jr. <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> >> On 5/4/2012 1:27 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> >>> In the Board agenda, we have a line where each Director can state they
> have
> >>> reviewed the report (before the meeting). They can also append queries
> and
> >>> comments. Little mini-discussions kinda happen in those comments.
> >>>
> >>> Point here is: provide a similar location for IPMC members (including
> >>> shepherds) to list their review/approval. There is no strict need to
> divvy
> >>> the reviews. Jukka is doing that as a transitionary measure until
> people
> >>> get into it.
> >>
> >> The approach would require just a couple of things;
> >>
> >> * designate a private report-review.txt file svn path which provides
> svn
> >> notification to the incubator-private list. Private, because both
> personal
> >> and confidential questions may be asked and answered in the scope of
> that
> >> approval/question/comment review file.
> >>
> >> * populate that file each month with the list of reports. Those
> reports
> >> themselves could continue to persist in the wiki or could be
> transfered
> >> into that internal edit/discuss report file.
> >>
> >> A comment to that svn review file would be broadcast, so that answers
> and the
> >> followup can either occur as a subsequent commit (asked and answered),
> or can
> >> evolve into an incubator-private mail list dialog (or be referred over
> to the
> >> podling-dev or podling-private list for clarification).
> >>
> >> In all I like the idea.
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
> > Programme Leader (Open Development)
> > OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>.
I was late to volunteer. Do you have any leftover projects?
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
> I've done my shepherd reviews and made one comment (about Amber) on
> this list). I'm not sure where you want general observations recording
> but I have moved the projects to the recommended status category
>
> On 7 May 2012 21:03, William A. Rowe Jr. <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>> On 5/4/2012 1:27 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>>> In the Board agenda, we have a line where each Director can state they have
>>> reviewed the report (before the meeting). They can also append queries and
>>> comments. Little mini-discussions kinda happen in those comments.
>>>
>>> Point here is: provide a similar location for IPMC members (including
>>> shepherds) to list their review/approval. There is no strict need to divvy
>>> the reviews. Jukka is doing that as a transitionary measure until people
>>> get into it.
>>
>> The approach would require just a couple of things;
>>
>> * designate a private report-review.txt file svn path which provides svn
>> notification to the incubator-private list. Private, because both personal
>> and confidential questions may be asked and answered in the scope of that
>> approval/question/comment review file.
>>
>> * populate that file each month with the list of reports. Those reports
>> themselves could continue to persist in the wiki or could be transfered
>> into that internal edit/discuss report file.
>>
>> A comment to that svn review file would be broadcast, so that answers and the
>> followup can either occur as a subsequent commit (asked and answered), or can
>> evolve into an incubator-private mail list dialog (or be referred over to the
>> podling-dev or podling-private list for clarification).
>>
>> In all I like the idea.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
> Programme Leader (Open Development)
> OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
I've done my shepherd reviews and made one comment (about Amber) on
this list). I'm not sure where you want general observations recording
but I have moved the projects to the recommended status category
On 7 May 2012 21:03, William A. Rowe Jr. <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> On 5/4/2012 1:27 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> In the Board agenda, we have a line where each Director can state they have
>> reviewed the report (before the meeting). They can also append queries and
>> comments. Little mini-discussions kinda happen in those comments.
>>
>> Point here is: provide a similar location for IPMC members (including
>> shepherds) to list their review/approval. There is no strict need to divvy
>> the reviews. Jukka is doing that as a transitionary measure until people
>> get into it.
>
> The approach would require just a couple of things;
>
> * designate a private report-review.txt file svn path which provides svn
> notification to the incubator-private list. Private, because both personal
> and confidential questions may be asked and answered in the scope of that
> approval/question/comment review file.
>
> * populate that file each month with the list of reports. Those reports
> themselves could continue to persist in the wiki or could be transfered
> into that internal edit/discuss report file.
>
> A comment to that svn review file would be broadcast, so that answers and the
> followup can either occur as a subsequent commit (asked and answered), or can
> evolve into an incubator-private mail list dialog (or be referred over to the
> podling-dev or podling-private list for clarification).
>
> In all I like the idea.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
--
Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
Programme Leader (Open Development)
OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
On 5/4/2012 1:27 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> In the Board agenda, we have a line where each Director can state they have
> reviewed the report (before the meeting). They can also append queries and
> comments. Little mini-discussions kinda happen in those comments.
>
> Point here is: provide a similar location for IPMC members (including
> shepherds) to list their review/approval. There is no strict need to divvy
> the reviews. Jukka is doing that as a transitionary measure until people
> get into it.
The approach would require just a couple of things;
* designate a private report-review.txt file svn path which provides svn
notification to the incubator-private list. Private, because both personal
and confidential questions may be asked and answered in the scope of that
approval/question/comment review file.
* populate that file each month with the list of reports. Those reports
themselves could continue to persist in the wiki or could be transfered
into that internal edit/discuss report file.
A comment to that svn review file would be broadcast, so that answers and the
followup can either occur as a subsequent commit (asked and answered), or can
evolve into an incubator-private mail list dialog (or be referred over to the
podling-dev or podling-private list for clarification).
In all I like the idea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
In the Board agenda, we have a line where each Director can state they have
reviewed the report (before the meeting). They can also append queries and
comments. Little mini-discussions kinda happen in those comments.
Point here is: provide a similar location for IPMC members (including
shepherds) to list their review/approval. There is no strict need to divvy
the reviews. Jukka is doing that as a transitionary measure until people
get into it.
IOW, there is no big deal if both Mohammad and Dave review Nuvem and Wink.
The real goal is at least one or more IPMC names associated with each
podling report. (beyond mentor signoffs?)
Another way to say it: Mohammad: go ahead and review all six. No big deal
if there is overlap.
(and if you believe six is a problem, then avoid becoming a Director; we
review something like 40 to 50... month after month... :-P)
It is this early review and signoff that is behind the need for receiving
reports in advance of the meeting. The hope is that all reports have been
reviewed by (all) the Directors beforehand, so we don't have to discuss
them in detail during the meeting. We stop and discuss when a Director
leaves a flag/query/concern in the report comments.
Cheers,
-g
On May 4, 2012 12:35 PM, "Mohammad Nour El-Din" <no...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi Jukka...
>
> I also added myself, but as being a Mentor of CloudStack I would rather
> take (shepherdZ: DeltaSpike, Nuvem, Wink) while Dave Fisher takes
> (shepherdY:
> CloudStack, NPanday, VCL)
>
> Dave would you please ACK that ?
>
> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitting@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:14 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>
> > wrote:
> > > This looks like a mind expanding activity. I added my name for a
> maximum
> > of 2 per month.
> >
> > Great, thanks!
> >
> > Would you mind taking a look at for example Nuvem and Wink this month?
> > Or pick some other yet unclaimed reports.
> >
> > BR,
> >
> > Jukka Zitting
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Thanks
> - Mohammad Nour
> ----
> "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving"
> - Albert Einstein
>
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On May 4, 2012, at 9:35 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote:
> Hi Jukka...
>
> I also added myself, but as being a Mentor of CloudStack I would rather
> take (shepherdZ: DeltaSpike, Nuvem, Wink) while Dave Fisher takes (shepherdY:
> CloudStack, NPanday, VCL)
>
> Dave would you please ACK that ?
Sorry Mohammad, I had already reviewed Wink and Nuvem. I only have time for two.
Wink:
From activity it looks like this project should have graduated into a TLP a year ago. It looks like a mature and well developed project. I don't understand why they think that they should become a subproject of Geronimo or Tuscany. They are a mature and useful tool. It's time for this bird to fly on its own wings. They are an example of a small, viable community that contributes to more than one other community. Podling Namesearch and graduation should be next.
For my $job, I'll likely ask my developers to take a look to see if this is a useful tool for some us.
Nuvem:
It is really hard to know what this project is trying to do other than be a common API for Cloud Apps. Very low activity. Apparently no users. A little pick up in dev activity recently. More information on the podling site might attract a few more developers. No release. This thread shows that the developers are aware:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-nuvem-dev/201201.mbox/%3CCANzUfzemiQBzxt%3DgFFM7tMBdyMv-q7H%2BvBB2xR0GxECs5y17KQ%40mail.gmail.com%3E
I suggest the Nuvem PPMC focus on explaining precisely what they are trying to build.
Regards,
Dave
>
> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:14 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>
>> wrote:
>>> This looks like a mind expanding activity. I added my name for a maximum
>> of 2 per month.
>>
>> Great, thanks!
>>
>> Would you mind taking a look at for example Nuvem and Wink this month?
>> Or pick some other yet unclaimed reports.
>>
>> BR,
>>
>> Jukka Zitting
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Thanks
> - Mohammad Nour
> ----
> "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving"
> - Albert Einstein
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Mohammad Nour El-Din <no...@gmail.com>.
Hi Jukka...
I also added myself, but as being a Mentor of CloudStack I would rather
take (shepherdZ: DeltaSpike, Nuvem, Wink) while Dave Fisher takes (shepherdY:
CloudStack, NPanday, VCL)
Dave would you please ACK that ?
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:14 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
> > This looks like a mind expanding activity. I added my name for a maximum
> of 2 per month.
>
> Great, thanks!
>
> Would you mind taking a look at for example Nuvem and Wink this month?
> Or pick some other yet unclaimed reports.
>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
--
Thanks
- Mohammad Nour
----
"Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving"
- Albert Einstein
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:14 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
> This looks like a mind expanding activity. I added my name for a maximum of 2 per month.
Great, thanks!
Would you mind taking a look at for example Nuvem and Wink this month?
Or pick some other yet unclaimed reports.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On May 3, 2012, at 2:06 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 8:23 PM, Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org> wrote:
>> Added my name,
>
> Great, thanks!
>
> Would you mind taking the role of "shepherdX" this month and giving a
> closer look at Clerezza, Lucene.NET and Syncope?
>
>> but, haven't mentors already kind of volunteered for this by virtue that they are mentoring?
>
> Yes, they have. Each mentor should in any case have reviewed the
> reports of their podlings and provided any required feedback.
>
> However, often mentors are "too close" to a project to tell whether
> the report gives a good enough picture of the project status without
> extra context. Also, there have been plenty of cases of absent or
> otherwise busy mentors leaving podlings with little or no effective
> review or feedback.
>
> For these reasons I think it's useful for at least one "outsider" from
> within the IPMC to do a closer review of the podling report before we
> forward it to the ASF board. If everything's fine, the mentors have
> already done their job and the task of the shepherd becomes just to OK
> the report and move on. If not, the shepherd should raise a flag for
> the podling community, its mentors, or ultimately the IPMC to resolve.
This looks like a mind expanding activity. I added my name for a maximum of 2 per month.
Thanks,
Dave
>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 8:23 PM, Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org> wrote:
> Added my name,
Great, thanks!
Would you mind taking the role of "shepherdX" this month and giving a
closer look at Clerezza, Lucene.NET and Syncope?
> but, haven't mentors already kind of volunteered for this by virtue that they are mentoring?
Yes, they have. Each mentor should in any case have reviewed the
reports of their podlings and provided any required feedback.
However, often mentors are "too close" to a project to tell whether
the report gives a good enough picture of the project status without
extra context. Also, there have been plenty of cases of absent or
otherwise busy mentors leaving podlings with little or no effective
review or feedback.
For these reasons I think it's useful for at least one "outsider" from
within the IPMC to do a closer review of the podling report before we
forward it to the ASF board. If everything's fine, the mentors have
already done their job and the task of the shepherd becomes just to OK
the report and move on. If not, the shepherd should raise a flag for
the podling community, its mentors, or ultimately the IPMC to resolve.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org>.
Added my name, but, haven't mentors already kind of volunteered for this by virtue that they are mentoring?
Matt Hogstrom
matt@hogstrom.org
A Day Without Nuclear Fusion Is a Day Without Sunshine
On May 2, 2012, at 5:14 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
>> I don't imagine the "bucketing" to be enshrined in written process, or
>> even be fixed. More of a convenience. We might do it by, for example,
>> asking Shepherds to identify the projects they would *prefer* to
>> shepherd and why.
>
> Sounds useful.
>
> If a volunteer shepherd qualifies his entry on the wiki page with
> something like "prefer $type projects like $x and $y", then I'll take
> that into account as best I can when assigning shepherds to projects.
> We can formalize that a bit once or if patterns start to emerge.
>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
> I don't imagine the "bucketing" to be enshrined in written process, or
> even be fixed. More of a convenience. We might do it by, for example,
> asking Shepherds to identify the projects they would *prefer* to
> shepherd and why.
Sounds useful.
If a volunteer shepherd qualifies his entry on the wiki page with
something like "prefer $type projects like $x and $y", then I'll take
that into account as best I can when assigning shepherds to projects.
We can formalize that a bit once or if patterns start to emerge.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
On 2 May 2012 12:50, Franklin, Matthew B. <mf...@mitre.org> wrote:
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Ross Gardler [mailto:rgardler@opendirective.com]
...
>>Looking a little further forward i.e. not suggesting this initial
>>small step should be transformed into a larger step but rather looking
>>at what the next small step might be...
>>
>>I'd like to revisit the idea of grouping projects, e.g. big data,
>>content, semantic, social etc. I imagine that people willing to be
>>Shepherds will also have specific areas of interest. I imagine that
>>shepherds would get more value from their time, and projects would get
>>more cross-community feedback, if try to match shepherds to projects.
>>For example, as a mentor on Wookie I'm interested in the progress of,
>>and potential for collaboration with, Wave. My interest isn't
>>sufficiently strong for me to dive into the dev list, but I'd
>>certainly be willing to help the IPMC and myself by Shepherding that
>>projects reports periodically.
>
> The only (small) issue with bucketing podlings is what do we do when one fits in more than one category? I think the idea would be useful in general, so long as we clearly define the rules for cross-cutting projects (ie they exist in both, they choose one, etc)
>
I don't imagine the "bucketing" to be enshrined in written process, or
even be fixed. More of a convenience. We might do it by, for example,
asking Shepherds to identify the projects they would *prefer* to
shepherd and why. To continue my example above I might say "I have an
interest in any social related podling so I would prefer to shepherd
Wave which is one such project I'm not a mentor on". Someone else
might say "I'm really interested in communications protocols and so I
will shepherd Wave".
I'm not suggesting formality, just a semblance of structure. I think
the best way to proceed is to get out list of shepherds, do a couple
of months and then discuss whether this proposed next step will add
anything to the process. My goal is to have more cross-community
awareness in the incubator projects as I've observed that those
projects that have someone actively seeking relationships tend to
build critical mass sooner. My proposed approach is only one thing
that might help in this regard.
Ross
Ross
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by "Franklin, Matthew B." <mf...@mitre.org>.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ross Gardler [mailto:rgardler@opendirective.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 7:24 AM
>To: general@incubator.apache.org
>Subject: Re: Shepherds for podling reports
>
>On 2 May 2012 10:19, Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Ross Gardler
>> <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
>>> This is a good idea. I have signed up.
>>
>> Excellent, thanks!
>>
>>> I only ask you bear one thing in mind. Some months active people here
>>> have lots of their own podlings reporting, which takes quite a bit of time
>>> if done diligently. When assigning shepherd each month please bear in
>>> mind how many reports they are already signing off on.
>>
>> Good point.
>>
>> How about we start with an approximation that being a mentor of one of
>> the reporting podlings is equivalent to reviewing the reports of three
>> other podlings? We can tweak that down the line based on experience.
>
>+1
>
>Looking a little further forward i.e. not suggesting this initial
>small step should be transformed into a larger step but rather looking
>at what the next small step might be...
>
>I'd like to revisit the idea of grouping projects, e.g. big data,
>content, semantic, social etc. I imagine that people willing to be
>Shepherds will also have specific areas of interest. I imagine that
>shepherds would get more value from their time, and projects would get
>more cross-community feedback, if try to match shepherds to projects.
>For example, as a mentor on Wookie I'm interested in the progress of,
>and potential for collaboration with, Wave. My interest isn't
>sufficiently strong for me to dive into the dev list, but I'd
>certainly be willing to help the IPMC and myself by Shepherding that
>projects reports periodically.
The only (small) issue with bucketing podlings is what do we do when one fits in more than one category? I think the idea would be useful in general, so long as we clearly define the rules for cross-cutting projects (ie they exist in both, they choose one, etc)
>
>Ross
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>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: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
On 2 May 2012 10:19, Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Ross Gardler
> <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
>> This is a good idea. I have signed up.
>
> Excellent, thanks!
>
>> I only ask you bear one thing in mind. Some months active people here
>> have lots of their own podlings reporting, which takes quite a bit of time
>> if done diligently. When assigning shepherd each month please bear in
>> mind how many reports they are already signing off on.
>
> Good point.
>
> How about we start with an approximation that being a mentor of one of
> the reporting podlings is equivalent to reviewing the reports of three
> other podlings? We can tweak that down the line based on experience.
+1
Looking a little further forward i.e. not suggesting this initial
small step should be transformed into a larger step but rather looking
at what the next small step might be...
I'd like to revisit the idea of grouping projects, e.g. big data,
content, semantic, social etc. I imagine that people willing to be
Shepherds will also have specific areas of interest. I imagine that
shepherds would get more value from their time, and projects would get
more cross-community feedback, if try to match shepherds to projects.
For example, as a mentor on Wookie I'm interested in the progress of,
and potential for collaboration with, Wave. My interest isn't
sufficiently strong for me to dive into the dev list, but I'd
certainly be willing to help the IPMC and myself by Shepherding that
projects reports periodically.
Ross
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Ross Gardler
<rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
> This is a good idea. I have signed up.
Excellent, thanks!
> I only ask you bear one thing in mind. Some months active people here
> have lots of their own podlings reporting, which takes quite a bit of time
> if done diligently. When assigning shepherd each month please bear in
> mind how many reports they are already signing off on.
Good point.
How about we start with an approximation that being a mentor of one of
the reporting podlings is equivalent to reviewing the reports of three
other podlings? We can tweak that down the line based on experience.
It's also fine to add a qualifier like "only when one of my mentored
podlings isn't reporting" or something similar on the wiki page to
further reduce the workload.
For now I'm willing to fill in to keep the amount of required effort
for anyone else to reasonable levels, but over time I'm hoping that we
get enough volunteers (and are able to clean up the backlog of
ungraduated projects) so that any single shepherd will only be
responsible for reviewing one or at most two reports per month.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
Jukka,
This is a good idea. I have signed up. I only ask you bear one thing
in mind. Some months active people here have lots of their own
podlings reporting, which takes quite a bit of time if done
diligently. When assigning shepherd each month please bear in mind how
many reports they are already signing off on.
That being said, I'm happy to help you as much as you need.
Ross
On 2 May 2012 09:53, Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In order to better share the effort of reviewing podling reports and
> giving constructive feedback where needed, I'd like to propose
> something like the shepherd model the ASF board is using for project
> reports. For each report a single "shepherd" [*] is assigned
> responsibility for a deeper review of the report and any followups
> that may be needed. Of course anyone within the IPMC is still welcome
> to help in the review, and in any case the mentors of a podling should
> review and sign off on the reports of their podlings.
>
> Any volunteer shepherds? Please sign up by adding your name to [1].
>
> [1] http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IncubatorShepherds
> [*] A shepherd watching over a podling... Perhaps someone has a better
> agricultural term in mind? :-)
>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
--
Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
Programme Leader (Open Development)
OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>
> On May 3, 2012, at 6:18 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
>...
>> The resulting TODOs are (see also the May2012 wiki page):
>>
>> - jukka: Airavata, Droids, SIS, Wookie, Zeta Components
>> - rgardler: Amber, PhotArk
>> - mfranklin: Ambari, Flex, Stanbol
>> - shepherdX: Clerezza, Lucene.NET, Syncope
>> - shepherdY: CloudStack, NPanday, VCL
>> - shepherdZ: DeltaSpike, Nuvem, Wink
>
> Even though I'm the mentor for VCL I now have to sign up to be a shepherd too?
Nope. Jukka is looking for *additional* people to review the reports
at the IPMC-level. You can continue to help VCL with their community
and their podling report. Some additional people will review and look
for concerns and action items for the IPMC to work on
(feedback/actions for podlings, or meta-level IPMC issues, etc). Then
Jukka bundles all that up and pops it up to the Board.
Cheers,
-g
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by "Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>.
On May 3, 2012, at 6:18 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> OK, so let's see how this works out in practice. We have 19 podling
> reports to review by next Wednesday (Ambari is still empty).
>
> To keep the required effort down to a reasonable level, I divided
> these to six slots of three reports each and divided them among me,
> Ross and Matt and three other potential volunteers. I'll take care of
> the outlying mini-report of the retiring Zeta Components.
>
> Since Ross is a mentor of four of the podlings that reported this
> month (nice!), I ideally would have excused him from all extra review
> duty this month. But since we're a bit low on volunteers (and Ross
> seemed eager enough :-), I decided to assign two reports to him and
> take the extra one myself. I also took Ross' stated interest into
> mobile stuff into account by assigning PhotArk (that's nowadays trying
> to become a HTML5/Cordova mobile app) to him before dividing the
> remaining reports in sequence.
>
> The resulting TODOs are (see also the May2012 wiki page):
>
> - jukka: Airavata, Droids, SIS, Wookie, Zeta Components
> - rgardler: Amber, PhotArk
> - mfranklin: Ambari, Flex, Stanbol
> - shepherdX: Clerezza, Lucene.NET, Syncope
> - shepherdY: CloudStack, NPanday, VCL
> - shepherdZ: DeltaSpike, Nuvem, Wink
Even though I'm the mentor for VCL I now have to sign up to be a shepherd too?
Regards,
Alan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
OK, so let's see how this works out in practice. We have 19 podling
reports to review by next Wednesday (Ambari is still empty).
To keep the required effort down to a reasonable level, I divided
these to six slots of three reports each and divided them among me,
Ross and Matt and three other potential volunteers. I'll take care of
the outlying mini-report of the retiring Zeta Components.
Since Ross is a mentor of four of the podlings that reported this
month (nice!), I ideally would have excused him from all extra review
duty this month. But since we're a bit low on volunteers (and Ross
seemed eager enough :-), I decided to assign two reports to him and
take the extra one myself. I also took Ross' stated interest into
mobile stuff into account by assigning PhotArk (that's nowadays trying
to become a HTML5/Cordova mobile app) to him before dividing the
remaining reports in sequence.
The resulting TODOs are (see also the May2012 wiki page):
- jukka: Airavata, Droids, SIS, Wookie, Zeta Components
- rgardler: Amber, PhotArk
- mfranklin: Ambari, Flex, Stanbol
- shepherdX: Clerezza, Lucene.NET, Syncope
- shepherdY: CloudStack, NPanday, VCL
- shepherdZ: DeltaSpike, Nuvem, Wink
Please reply if you'd like to volunteer as one of the X, Y or Z
shepherds. No longer-term involvement required, if you like you can
just volunteer for a one-off round of reviews this month.
See my earlier mails [1,2] for a quick summary of the kind of stuff I
personally do when reviewing a podling report. That level of review
should require less than an hour of effort for three reports, plus
some extra time in case extra feedback or other followup is needed.
Matt, can you take care of pursuing a report from Ambari or, if they
can't make it in reasonable time, ask them to report again next month?
[1] http://markmail.org/message/2gkehvvwvdbcm6uz
[2] http://markmail.org/message/vd2jkqn4su34mfon
BR,
Jukka Zitting
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by "Franklin, Matthew B." <mf...@mitre.org>.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ross Gardler [mailto:rgardler@opendirective.com]
>Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 8:42 AM
>To: general@incubator.apache.org
>Subject: Re: Shepherds for podling reports
>
>On 10 May 2012 13:39, Franklin, Matthew B. <mf...@mitre.org> wrote:
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Ross Gardler [mailto:rgardler@opendirective.com]
>>>Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 8:32 AM
>>>To: general@incubator.apache.org
>>>Subject: Re: Shepherds for podling reports
>>>
>>>Thanks Jukka,
>>>
>>>One of the issues to address for next time is where to record
>>>shepherds comments (if any). I suggest we do it directly in the
>>>reports, in the Wiki. This requires no additional processes to
>>>implement.
>>
>> I thought that the discussions that sprung up around the shepherd
>comments were very valuable. While in the wiki, we might get to an out of
>sight, out of mind scenario with these comments and lose the discussions &
>Incubator awareness that they brought.
>>
>
>I am only talking about where they are *recorded*, they should still
>be discussed in the same way.
OK. Thanks for clarifying.
>
>Ross
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>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: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
On 10 May 2012 13:39, Franklin, Matthew B. <mf...@mitre.org> wrote:
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Ross Gardler [mailto:rgardler@opendirective.com]
>>Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 8:32 AM
>>To: general@incubator.apache.org
>>Subject: Re: Shepherds for podling reports
>>
>>Thanks Jukka,
>>
>>One of the issues to address for next time is where to record
>>shepherds comments (if any). I suggest we do it directly in the
>>reports, in the Wiki. This requires no additional processes to
>>implement.
>
> I thought that the discussions that sprung up around the shepherd comments were very valuable. While in the wiki, we might get to an out of sight, out of mind scenario with these comments and lose the discussions & Incubator awareness that they brought.
>
I am only talking about where they are *recorded*, they should still
be discussed in the same way.
Ross
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by "Franklin, Matthew B." <mf...@mitre.org>.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ross Gardler [mailto:rgardler@opendirective.com]
>Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 8:32 AM
>To: general@incubator.apache.org
>Subject: Re: Shepherds for podling reports
>
>Thanks Jukka,
>
>One of the issues to address for next time is where to record
>shepherds comments (if any). I suggest we do it directly in the
>reports, in the Wiki. This requires no additional processes to
>implement.
I thought that the discussions that sprung up around the shepherd comments were very valuable. While in the wiki, we might get to an out of sight, out of mind scenario with these comments and lose the discussions & Incubator awareness that they brought.
>
>Once the shepherd process is working smoothly I'd also suggest that we
>think about changing the whole submission process to one identical to
>that followed by TLPs (i.e. commit to SVN, notify the general@ mailing
>list). This means that projects are learning how it is done for TLPs
>whilst also allowing the IPMC to adopt some of the same processes as
>the board does in providing the IPMC report.
+1
>
>Furthermore, once this is also in place for IPMC reports we can use
>(slightly modified) Whimsy scripts to make shepherds work easier and
>the posting of reports here provides a place for shepherds/mentors and
>project members to discuss issues.
>
>Ross
>
>On 10 May 2012 13:24, Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just submitted our May report to the board. Thanks a lot to anyone
>> who chimed in with reviews and other help! Very much appreciated.
>>
>> Let's try this again for the next report, perhaps in a bit more timely
>> and organized manner now that we're through the initial setup and have
>> more volunteers lined up already in advance.
>>
>> Some good comments and ideas were brought up in this thread. Feel free
>> to just go ahead and start implementing any incremental improvements
>> that you think will help. I'm not too concerned about the particular
>> mechanics or processes we use as long as they help generate
>> constructive feedback to and increased dialogue with our podlings.
>>
>> BR,
>>
>> Jukka Zitting
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>
>
>
>--
>Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
>Programme Leader (Open Development)
>OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>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: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
Thanks Jukka,
One of the issues to address for next time is where to record
shepherds comments (if any). I suggest we do it directly in the
reports, in the Wiki. This requires no additional processes to
implement.
Once the shepherd process is working smoothly I'd also suggest that we
think about changing the whole submission process to one identical to
that followed by TLPs (i.e. commit to SVN, notify the general@ mailing
list). This means that projects are learning how it is done for TLPs
whilst also allowing the IPMC to adopt some of the same processes as
the board does in providing the IPMC report.
Furthermore, once this is also in place for IPMC reports we can use
(slightly modified) Whimsy scripts to make shepherds work easier and
the posting of reports here provides a place for shepherds/mentors and
project members to discuss issues.
Ross
On 10 May 2012 13:24, Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just submitted our May report to the board. Thanks a lot to anyone
> who chimed in with reviews and other help! Very much appreciated.
>
> Let's try this again for the next report, perhaps in a bit more timely
> and organized manner now that we're through the initial setup and have
> more volunteers lined up already in advance.
>
> Some good comments and ideas were brought up in this thread. Feel free
> to just go ahead and start implementing any incremental improvements
> that you think will help. I'm not too concerned about the particular
> mechanics or processes we use as long as they help generate
> constructive feedback to and increased dialogue with our podlings.
>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
--
Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
Programme Leader (Open Development)
OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
I just submitted our May report to the board. Thanks a lot to anyone
who chimed in with reviews and other help! Very much appreciated.
Let's try this again for the next report, perhaps in a bit more timely
and organized manner now that we're through the initial setup and have
more volunteers lined up already in advance.
Some good comments and ideas were brought up in this thread. Feel free
to just go ahead and start implementing any incremental improvements
that you think will help. I'm not too concerned about the particular
mechanics or processes we use as long as they help generate
constructive feedback to and increased dialogue with our podlings.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by "Franklin, Matthew B." <mf...@mitre.org>.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jukka Zitting [mailto:jukka.zitting@gmail.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 4:54 AM
>To: general
>Subject: Shepherds for podling reports
>
>Hi,
>
>In order to better share the effort of reviewing podling reports and
>giving constructive feedback where needed, I'd like to propose
>something like the shepherd model the ASF board is using for project
>reports. For each report a single "shepherd" [*] is assigned
>responsibility for a deeper review of the report and any followups
>that may be needed. Of course anyone within the IPMC is still welcome
>to help in the review, and in any case the mentors of a podling should
>review and sign off on the reports of their podlings.
>
>Any volunteer shepherds? Please sign up by adding your name to [1].
+1. Added my name
>
>[1] http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IncubatorShepherds
>[*] A shepherd watching over a podling... Perhaps someone has a better
>agricultural term in mind? :-)
>
>BR,
>
>Jukka Zitting
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>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: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Mohammad Nour El-Din <no...@gmail.com>.
Hi Alan...
On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Alan D. Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com>wrote:
> Thanks for replying with a thoughtful response.
>
> Jukka put forth the idea of shepherds as a proposal. I was merely
> replying to that proposal with my own considered ideas.
>
> I am encouraged about the enthusiasm but I feel that it blurs the
> responsibility of the mentor. Shepherding the shepherds of a podling, i.e.
> mentors, seems to me like the wrong way to go. It does add process. If
> one carefully re-reads posts to this thread there's all sorts of extra
> complexity being considered such as groupings of podlings and clearly
> defining the rules for cross-cutting projects, etc. Not that this is
> what's going to finally be adopted.
>
> Incubation is confusing enough as it is.
>
> Sprinkling more process, roles, and bureaucracy is not the solution to, my
> mind, mentors who need to be politely pinged. This is just my humble
> opinion.
>
> With that said, the shepherds have my sincere best wishes and I am happy
> to cooperate for those podlings where I am mentor.
>
> Thanks again for your kind reply.
>
You still have a point, but lets give it a try and adjust the idea along
the way :), maybe come up with another idea if this didn't work out
>
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>
>
> On May 5, 2012, at 1:04 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote:
>
> > Hi Alan
> >
> > For sure your point may be valid, but the whole point, if you read the
> > whole thread from the beginning, which I am sure you did, you will notice
> > that Jukka mentioned that this is a start and will assess the effort and
> > the whole plan after giving it sometime.
> >
> > And actually having other people looking into reports, from one side that
> > will help mentors and from the other side it is as mentioned by Alex a
> > fresh eye, who can poke around and ask questions or even provide more
> help.
> >
> > On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <list@toolazydogs.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On May 5, 2012, at 11:07 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> >>
> >>> If you don't want to be a Shepherd, don't sign up.
> >>
> >> Yeah, I get that part.
> >>
> >>> The board asked us
> >>> to do a better job of reviewing reports and detecting mentor
> >>> deficiencies.
> >>
> >> I get that too.
> >>
> >>> This is a plan to accomplish that.
> >>
> >> My opinion about the plan stands.
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Alan
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thanks
> > - Mohammad Nour
> > ----
> > "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep
> moving"
> > - Albert Einstein
>
>
--
Thanks
- Mohammad Nour
----
"Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving"
- Albert Einstein
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by "Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>.
Thanks for replying with a thoughtful response.
Jukka put forth the idea of shepherds as a proposal. I was merely replying to that proposal with my own considered ideas.
I am encouraged about the enthusiasm but I feel that it blurs the responsibility of the mentor. Shepherding the shepherds of a podling, i.e. mentors, seems to me like the wrong way to go. It does add process. If one carefully re-reads posts to this thread there's all sorts of extra complexity being considered such as groupings of podlings and clearly defining the rules for cross-cutting projects, etc. Not that this is what's going to finally be adopted.
Incubation is confusing enough as it is.
Sprinkling more process, roles, and bureaucracy is not the solution to, my mind, mentors who need to be politely pinged. This is just my humble opinion.
With that said, the shepherds have my sincere best wishes and I am happy to cooperate for those podlings where I am mentor.
Thanks again for your kind reply.
Regards,
Alan
On May 5, 2012, at 1:04 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote:
> Hi Alan
>
> For sure your point may be valid, but the whole point, if you read the
> whole thread from the beginning, which I am sure you did, you will notice
> that Jukka mentioned that this is a start and will assess the effort and
> the whole plan after giving it sometime.
>
> And actually having other people looking into reports, from one side that
> will help mentors and from the other side it is as mentioned by Alex a
> fresh eye, who can poke around and ask questions or even provide more help.
>
> On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com>wrote:
>
>>
>> On May 5, 2012, at 11:07 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>
>>> If you don't want to be a Shepherd, don't sign up.
>>
>> Yeah, I get that part.
>>
>>> The board asked us
>>> to do a better job of reviewing reports and detecting mentor
>>> deficiencies.
>>
>> I get that too.
>>
>>> This is a plan to accomplish that.
>>
>> My opinion about the plan stands.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Alan
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Thanks
> - Mohammad Nour
> ----
> "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving"
> - Albert Einstein
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Mohammad Nour El-Din <no...@gmail.com>.
Hi Alan
For sure your point may be valid, but the whole point, if you read the
whole thread from the beginning, which I am sure you did, you will notice
that Jukka mentioned that this is a start and will assess the effort and
the whole plan after giving it sometime.
And actually having other people looking into reports, from one side that
will help mentors and from the other side it is as mentioned by Alex a
fresh eye, who can poke around and ask questions or even provide more help.
On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com>wrote:
>
> On May 5, 2012, at 11:07 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>
> > If you don't want to be a Shepherd, don't sign up.
>
> Yeah, I get that part.
>
> > The board asked us
> > to do a better job of reviewing reports and detecting mentor
> > deficiencies.
>
> I get that too.
>
> > This is a plan to accomplish that.
>
> My opinion about the plan stands.
>
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
--
Thanks
- Mohammad Nour
----
"Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving"
- Albert Einstein
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by "Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>.
On May 5, 2012, at 11:07 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> If you don't want to be a Shepherd, don't sign up.
Yeah, I get that part.
> The board asked us
> to do a better job of reviewing reports and detecting mentor
> deficiencies.
I get that too.
> This is a plan to accomplish that.
My opinion about the plan stands.
Regards,
Alan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>.
If you don't want to be a Shepherd, don't sign up. The board asked us
to do a better job of reviewing reports and detecting mentor
deficiencies. This is a plan to accomplish that.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by "Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>.
On May 5, 2012, at 9:04 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
> On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>>
>> On May 2, 2012, at 1:53 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> In order to better share the effort of reviewing podling reports and
>>> giving constructive feedback where needed, I'd like to propose
>>> something like the shepherd model the ASF board is using for project
>>> reports. For each report a single "shepherd" [*] is assigned
>>> responsibility for a deeper review of the report and any followups
>>> that may be needed. Of course anyone within the IPMC is still welcome
>>> to help in the review, and in any case the mentors of a podling should
>>> review and sign off on the reports of their podlings.
>>>
>>> Any volunteer shepherds? Please sign up by adding your name to [1].
>>>
>>> [1] http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IncubatorShepherds
>>> [*] A shepherd watching over a podling... Perhaps someone has a better
>>> agricultural term in mind? :-)
>>
>> I feel that I should state my opinion, and this is just my humble opinion, that the solution to a problem is not to add more process, bureaucracy, and roles.
>>
>> It's my opinion that this task should be done by the mentors, period. If people have spare bandwidth they then should sign up to be a mentor.
>>
>> Just my 2 cents.
>
> Thanks Alan, I always appreciate your input.
>
> However I think Jukka is simply asking for more "fresh" eye balls to
> help in the review before submission of the composite report. The
> shear time, and volume of work required to properly review all those
> Incubator Podling reports can be overwhelming for a single person:
> delegation is very sensible.
>
> I don't think there's more process or more bureaucracy. IMHO it's a
> good, non-bureaucratic evolutionary step towards better management.
> Honestly when I try to put myself into the IPMC Chair's perspective to
> understand the amount of work and responsibility he has, I get
> overwhelmed.
I understand and sympathize that it's a lot of work for the IPMC chair but frankly, I had always thought that this bit of responsibility was delegated to the mentors which is why mentors usually needed to be IPMC members.
It is more process, reports are now to be checked by a new role in addition to being checked by the mentors, and bureaucracy, there are signup sheets, and now there are new roles, shepherds. Now the shepherds need to be tracked to see if there is sufficient coverage for report checking.
IMNSHO, the elephant in the room is MIA mentors.
Regards,
Alan
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by Alex Karasulu <ak...@apache.org>.
On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Alan D. Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>
> On May 2, 2012, at 1:53 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> In order to better share the effort of reviewing podling reports and
>> giving constructive feedback where needed, I'd like to propose
>> something like the shepherd model the ASF board is using for project
>> reports. For each report a single "shepherd" [*] is assigned
>> responsibility for a deeper review of the report and any followups
>> that may be needed. Of course anyone within the IPMC is still welcome
>> to help in the review, and in any case the mentors of a podling should
>> review and sign off on the reports of their podlings.
>>
>> Any volunteer shepherds? Please sign up by adding your name to [1].
>>
>> [1] http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IncubatorShepherds
>> [*] A shepherd watching over a podling... Perhaps someone has a better
>> agricultural term in mind? :-)
>
> I feel that I should state my opinion, and this is just my humble opinion, that the solution to a problem is not to add more process, bureaucracy, and roles.
>
> It's my opinion that this task should be done by the mentors, period. If people have spare bandwidth they then should sign up to be a mentor.
>
> Just my 2 cents.
Thanks Alan, I always appreciate your input.
However I think Jukka is simply asking for more "fresh" eye balls to
help in the review before submission of the composite report. The
shear time, and volume of work required to properly review all those
Incubator Podling reports can be overwhelming for a single person:
delegation is very sensible.
I don't think there's more process or more bureaucracy. IMHO it's a
good, non-bureaucratic evolutionary step towards better management.
Honestly when I try to put myself into the IPMC Chair's perspective to
understand the amount of work and responsibility he has, I get
overwhelmed.
--
Best Regards,
-- Alex
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Shepherds for podling reports
Posted by "Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>.
On May 2, 2012, at 1:53 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In order to better share the effort of reviewing podling reports and
> giving constructive feedback where needed, I'd like to propose
> something like the shepherd model the ASF board is using for project
> reports. For each report a single "shepherd" [*] is assigned
> responsibility for a deeper review of the report and any followups
> that may be needed. Of course anyone within the IPMC is still welcome
> to help in the review, and in any case the mentors of a podling should
> review and sign off on the reports of their podlings.
>
> Any volunteer shepherds? Please sign up by adding your name to [1].
>
> [1] http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IncubatorShepherds
> [*] A shepherd watching over a podling... Perhaps someone has a better
> agricultural term in mind? :-)
I feel that I should state my opinion, and this is just my humble opinion, that the solution to a problem is not to add more process, bureaucracy, and roles.
It's my opinion that this task should be done by the mentors, period. If people have spare bandwidth they then should sign up to be a mentor.
Just my 2 cents.
Regards,
Alan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org