/* Initialise ASF-aligned learning metrics */
<<set $transparency = 0>> /* Visibility and clarity of mentor and podling communication */
<<set $collaboration = 0>> /* Coordination among mentors, IPMC, and podling */
<<set $shortcuts = 0>> /* Skipping process or inconsistent mentoring */
<<set $escalation = 0>> /* Premature or unnecessary escalation */
<<set $steps = 0>>
You are one of three mentors working with an incubating Apache podling.
The podling has prepared a release candidate.
Mentor A says: "Looks good—go ahead and call the vote."
Mentor B says: "Hold on, the license headers need more review."
The podling is now unsure what to do. After some confusion, they post to general@incubator:
> “We’re getting mixed signals from our mentors. Could someone clarify the right process?”
This is a healthy sign — the podling is trying to understand ASF expectations.
What do you do next?
<<link "Thank the podling for asking publicly and clarify policy on-list">><<goto "A">><</link>>
<<link "Reach out to the other mentors privately to coordinate">><<goto "B">><</link>>
<<link "Ask the IPMC to handle it for you">><<goto "C">><</link>>
<<link "Tell the podling to just move forward">><<goto "D">><</link>>
<<link "Stay silent and let others answer">><<goto "E">><</link>><<set $steps += 1>>
<<set $transparency += 2>> /* Public clarification supports openness */
<<set $collaboration += 2>> /* Encourages joint mentor and IPMC understanding */
You reply to the general@ thread:
> “Thanks for raising this. It’s fine to ask here when advice seems inconsistent — this helps everyone learn.
> Let’s confirm what the Release Policy says and align together.”
Mentors and IPMC members chime in with consistent guidance. The podling feels supported and continues confidently.
<<link "Go to Resolution">><<goto "Resolution">><</link>><<set $steps += 1>>
<<set $collaboration += 1>> /* Improves mentor alignment */
<<set $transparency -= 1>> /* Not yet visible to the podling */
You message the other mentors privately to compare notes.
Everyone quickly realises the disagreement came from different interpretations of the same rule.
<<link "Post a public summary on dev@ explaining the resolution">><<goto "B1Good">><</link>>
<<link "Assume the podling will see the outcome later">><<goto "B1Weak">><</link>>
<<link "Privately tell the podling to follow your version">><<goto "B2Poor">><</link>><<set $transparency += 2>> /* Visibility reinforces trust */
<<set $collaboration += 1>> /* Mentors act in unity */
You post on dev@:
> “Mentors compared notes — we were talking past each other.
> The podling did the right thing by asking for clarification.”
This strengthens both mentor coordination and the podling’s trust.
<<link "Go to Resolution">><<goto "Resolution">><</link>><<set $shortcuts += 1>> /* Fails to close the loop publicly */
<<set $transparency -= 1>> /* Podling left guessing */
Mentors agree privately but never share the conclusion.
The podling assumes things are fine but still feels uncertain next time.
<<link "Go to Partial">><<goto "Partial">><</link>><<set $shortcuts += 2>> /* Mentor bypasses open process */
<<set $transparency -= 2>> /* Hidden communication */
You message the podling privately:
> “Just go with my view — the others will catch up.”
Confusion deepens, and IPMC members later intervene to untangle mixed messages.
<<link "Go to Damage">><<goto "Damage">><</link>><<set $steps += 1>>
<<set $escalation += 2>> /* Premature escalation by mentor */
<<set $collaboration -= 1>> /* Mentors skip coordination */
You reply on general@ asking the IPMC to “step in and decide.”
An IPMC member replies that mentors should align first and then guide the podling together.
<<link "Acknowledge and regroup with mentors">><<goto "C1Recover">><</link>>
<<link "Defend your escalation publicly">><<goto "C2Bad">><</link>><<set $collaboration += 1>> /* Learns from premature escalation */
<<set $transparency += 1>> /* Restores openness */
You follow up:
> “Thanks — agreed. We’ll align as mentors first, then clarify on dev@.”
The podling learns the right order: mentors coordinate before asking IPMC to rule.
<<link "Go to Partial">><<goto "Partial">><</link>><<set $escalation += 1>> /* Adds tension */
<<set $transparency -= 1>> /* Public noise without resolution */
You continue debating on-list. The IPMC discussion grows confusing and off-topic.
<<link "Go to Damage">><<goto "Damage">><</link>><<set $steps += 1>>
<<set $shortcuts += 2>> /* Skips mentor alignment */
<<set $collaboration -= 2>> /* Ignores peer coordination */
You tell the podling:
> “Don’t overthink it — just start the vote.”
When the other mentor objects publicly, the thread turns tense.
The podling apologises for “doing the wrong thing.”
<<link "Acknowledge mistake and clarify process">><<goto "D1Recover">><</link>>
<<link "Defend your advice as correct">><<goto "D2Defensive">><</link>><<set $transparency += 2>> /* Correcting publicly supports learning */
<<set $collaboration += 1>> /* Restores some trust */
You admit the misstep and share a link to the ASF Release Policy.
Others appreciate the humility.
<<link "Go to Partial">><<goto "Partial">><</link>><<set $transparency -= 1>> /* Defensive tone reduces clarity */
<<set $collaboration -= 1>> /* Mentor tension remains */
You double down:
> “We’re wasting time on bureaucracy.”
The IPMC intervenes, reminding mentors that consistency and transparency matter.
<<link "Go to Damage">><<goto "Damage">><</link>><<set $steps += 1>>
<<set $transparency -= 1>> /* Silence adds ambiguity */
<<set $collaboration -= 1>> /* Missed mentoring opportunity */
You watch silently while others debate on general@.
The podling feels ignored.
<<link "Step in late to summarise policy">><<goto "E1Recover">><</link>>
<<link "Stay silent until IPMC wraps it up">><<goto "E2Fail">><</link>><<set $transparency += 1>> /* Late but helpful clarification */
<<set $collaboration += 1>> /* Re-engagement improves tone */
You eventually post a short clarification and link to ASF documentation.
It helps, but the delay cost momentum.
<<link "Go to Partial">><<goto "Partial">><</link>><<set $shortcuts += 1>> /* Avoidance harms trust */
<<set $collaboration -= 1>> /* Lost opportunity for guidance */
The IPMC wraps up the thread with general reminders about mentor coordination.
The podling learns little about how to handle such issues themselves.
<<link "Go to Damage">><<goto "Damage">><</link>><<set $steps += 1>>
The mentors eventually aligned, and the podling learned some lessons.
Still, confusion lingered, slowing community confidence.
<<link "Reflect on your choices">><<goto "Reflect">><</link>><<set $steps += 1>>
✅ The mentors reinforced ASF culture through open, coordinated guidance.
The podling learned that asking questions publicly is healthy and valued.
The IPMC cited this as an example of positive escalation.
<<link "Reflect on your choices">><<goto "Reflect">><</link>><<set $steps += 1>>
Mentor inconsistency and private direction caused frustration.
The podling delayed progress, unsure whom to trust.
The IPMC reminded mentors that alignment and visibility are key parts of their role.
<<link "Reflect on your choices">><<goto "Reflect">><</link>><<set $total = $transparency + $collaboration - $shortcuts - $escalation>>
You’ve reached the end of the scenario. Let’s reflect.
<<if $total >= 8>>
You demonstrated ASF-aligned mentoring: open communication, mentor coordination, and positive reinforcement of podling independence.
<</if>>
<<if $total >= 4 and $total < 8>>
You achieved a solid outcome with partial transparency or delayed alignment.
The podling still benefited, but earlier openness would improve learning.
<</if>>
<<if $total >= 0 and $total < 4>>
You restored some order but with limited visibility or inconsistent guidance.
The podling might hesitate to ask for clarification next time.
<</if>>
<<if $total < 0>>
Mentor misalignment and opaque communication eroded trust.
More transparent, coordinated mentoring would strengthen ASF culture.
<</if>>
Reflection Questions:
- How can mentors maintain consistent understanding of ASF policy?
- What should a podling do when mentor advice is unclear?
- When is escalation to the IPMC appropriate or healthy?
<<link "Restart Scenario">><<goto "Start">><</link>>