Page History

...

• Community Over Code: decisions belong to the community, not to individuals or companies.
• Meritocracy: everyone’s voice matters; greater influence is earned through sustained, constructive contribution.
• Transparency: decisions are made publicly on the project mailing list.
• Respect and Inclusiveness: open discussion and differing perspectives strengthen consensus — it’s . It’s built through dialogue, not uniformity.

...

The Incubator PMC (IPMC) provides oversight on behalf of the ASF Board while during a project is in 's incubation period.
IPMC votes — for example, PMC votes on releases and graduations — are , which is how this oversight is exercised.
Once a project graduates, those decisions move are made entirely to by its own PMC.

...

3. Who Can Vote and When

Releases in the Incubator use a two-stage voting process:

...

• Start with discussion, not a vote. Explain the problem and seek input first.
• Summarize the outcome. After any vote or discussion, record the decision on the list for future reference.
• Encourage participation. Invite new contributors to share their perspectives.
• Welcome differing views. Open discussion strengthens decisions; don’t rush to closure.
• Document objections respectfully. Disagreement is part of the process, not a personal conflict.
• Use votes wisely. They help confirm and record consensus when the discussion concludes or when clarity is needed.
• Avoid “vote first” culture. Votes without discussion often signal poor engagement.
• Watch for imbalances. If one mentor or vendor dominates voting, pause to re-examine how decisions are being made.
• Assume good faith. Differences of opinion are normal — respectful and respectful dialogue keeps the community healthy.

...

When closing a vote, post a clear summary listing binding and non-binding votes separately.
Include a short outcome statement (e.g., “The vote passed with 3 binding +1s and no objections”), and link to the discussion thread.
This helps future reviewers, mentors, and auditors easily locate the record of decisions.
Only votes made on official ASF-managed mailing lists are recognized as valid.
Off-list or private votes should never happen — and all decision-making must be visible to the community.

...

• Make decisions publicly and transparently.
• Understand when formal votes are required.
• Engage community members early in the discussion.
• Avoid private or off-list decision-making.
• Learn that healthy consensus welcomes open dialogue and differing perspectives.
• Recognize that votes can help confirm and document community agreement when discussions reach alignment.
• Guide without steering — mentors . Mentors enable the community to make its own decisions.

Escalation and IPMC Support
If consensus breaks down or a podling is unsure about the process (for example, during release or personnel votes), mentors may request guidance from the IPMC on general@incubator.apache.org.
The IPMC’s role is advisory and oversight-based — , helping the community learn ASF practices , not deciding without making decisions on its behalf.

Mentors as Bridges
Mentors act as bridges between the podling and the broader ASF community, helping translate ASF expectations and ensuring that podling practices remain aligned with Foundation policies throughout incubation.

Mentors should model good practice — explaining . They should explain reasoning, clarifying clarify ASF norms, and gently guiding guide PPMC discussions when votes are misused or rushed.

...

7. Common Anti-Patterns

...

8. Tying Consensus to Graduation

Demonstrating effective consensus building is part of showing community maturity.
The IPMC and Board look for evidence that the podling can govern itself independently.

...