cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From John Burwell <john.burw...@shapeblue.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Emeritus Committer Status
Date Wed, 20 Apr 2016 12:26:53 GMT
Erik,

The following is the response I received from infra about managing emeritus committers:

	commit bits are...binary bits, they can be 1 or they can be 0. We don’t
	operate with trinary bits here, sorry

	If you want to have emeritus committers, your best bet is to remove them
	from the ldap group and keep a log in your pmc dir of their names.

So, we need to manage a separate list of emeritus committers.  Personally, I don’t find
that too onerous as I doubt we will have people moving between active and emeritus very often.

Thanks,
-John

> 
Regards,

John Burwell

john.burwell@shapeblue.com 
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
On Apr 20, 2016, at 6:11 AM, John Burwell <john.burwell@shapeblue.com> wrote:
> 
> Erik,
> 
> Good question about the mechanics.  I agree that removal of accounts would not be correct.
 It should only be the removal/suspension of the CloudStack commit bit and karma.  In terms
of LDAP, my (naive) expectation is that since other projects have this status, infra already
has a way to manage it.  I will send an email to infra asking them how it is managed for other
projects and report back to dev@.
> 
> Thanks,
> -John
> 
>> 
> Regards,
> 
> John Burwell
> 
> john.burwell@shapeblue.com 
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London VA WC2N 4HSUK
> @shapeblue
> On Apr 20, 2016, at 4:01 AM, Erik Weber <terbolous@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 11:42 PM, John Burwell <john.burwell@shapeblue.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> All,
>>> 
>>> As I am sure many have observed, we have a large number of committers [1]
>>> who are no longer active.  Currently, we no status that continues to
>>> recognize someone’s committer merit while allowing them to declare inactive
>>> in the project.  To address this gap, I am proposed amending our project
>>> bylaws [2] as follows:
>>> 
>>> 
>> +1 to introduce emeritus status
>> 
>> 
>>> 2.3.4  A committer is considered "emeritus" by sending their declaration
>>> to private@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:private@cloudstack.apache.org>.
>>> An emeritus committer may return to "active" status by sending their
>>> declaration to private@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:
>>> private@cloudstack.apache.org>.
>>> No vote is required for a committer change from “emeritus" to “active"
>>> status.
>>> 
>>> 
>> What exactly does going emeritus mean?
>> 
>> Removal of commit bit/access on the account? Disabling/removal of account?
>> I am -1 for the latter, as people might have used their apache.org email
>> address elsewhere or might be committers elsewhere disallowing us from
>> doing this, but I can be +1 for removing karma/commit bit.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> 2.3.5 "Active committters" are all non-emeritus committers.
>>> 
>>> These clauses were inspired by the Apache Cocoon [3] bylaws [4].  To be
>>> clear, a committer never loses their merit, and only a committer can decide
>>> to go emeritus.  Since merit is never lost, a emeritus committer may return
>>> to active status at anytime by simply informing the PMC of their intention
>>> to be active again.  No one can require that committer change to emeritus
>>> status.
>>> 
>>> On the website, we would place emeritus committers in a separate section —
>>> allowing users to more easily identify those that are actively
>>> participating in the project.
>>> 
>>> 
>> I am not sure how we keep this updated in an automated way. If we remove
>> emeritus members from the LDAP group, we have a way to fetch active ones,
>> but no way to fetch inactive/emeritus.
>> 
>> Haven't asked infra, but perhaps it could be possible to add an emeritus
>> ldap group or something like that
>> 
>> -- 
>> Erik
> 

Mime
View raw message