community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Niclas Hedhman <>
Subject Re: Incubating, Graduating & Code of conduct @ The ASF (spin-off of Better specifying....)
Date Sun, 05 Jul 2015 07:33:28 GMT
Since Apache Zest (where I am the PMC Chair) was mentioned about called out
by the Board to create by-laws, I got curious to understand where that came
from, since I couldn't recall such order.

In reality, I wrote (copied) it myself in the Board Resolution to create
the project in the first place;

RESOLVED, that the initial Apache Zest Project be and hereby
       is tasked with the creation of a set of bylaws intended to
       encourage open development and increased participation in the
       Apache Zest Project.

My guess is that this is a standard text from way back in time. Last time I
was involved in establishing a new project (Avalon) before Incubator, we
had a pointer to the Jakarta by-laws and I think that was perpetuated to a
point where it become the default position, until Jakarta is retired and
the origin of the "default" is gone.

Pierre may have a point in that the Board Resolution text could be
formulated differently to reflect this "default" and "lazy" position.

On Jul 4, 2015 18:35, "Pierre Smits" <> wrote:

> >> Having such an official ASF policy without the executing office policing
> >> it, without podlings being required to accept and instill it in their
> >> bylaws before graduation and allowing existing projects not to
> incorporate
> >> it makes it nothing more than a hollow statement,
> >>
> > Being part of IPMC, I thought it was part of the incubator to make sure
> that
> > exactly this happened.
> Having done a cursory review of the incubator reports to the board for this
> year (January till May/June 2015), I found that only the SAMOA podling
> reported working on a project set of bylaws, which without knowing details
> could encompass and/or incorporate the code of conduct.
> None of the other podlings reported about that. Having looked also at the
> board reports for January up to May 2015 I found that podlings graduating
> to TLP were either tasked by the board to establish a set of bylaws or not.
> This tells me that acceptance/incorporation of the code of conduct of the
> ASF by the podlings is not a requirement.
> It might also mean - given the code of conduct as it is today - that IPMC
> members (as mentors) are either not fully aware that
> acceptance/incorporation is part of incubation process, or that they
> consider it optional.
> What I also observed from the board reports (minutes) from Jan till May is
> that while graduating podlings (as part of their establisment as a TLP)
> where tasked by the board to create a set of bylaws, that up to now those
> projects (Apache Whimsy, Apache Orc, Apache Parquet, Apache Aurora, Apache
> Zest) don't reference anything about a set of bylaws.
> And one graduating (Apache Samza) was not tasked with creating a set of
> bylaws at all by the board.
> It seems to me that this viewpoint of flexibility for projects has led to
> various approaches applied during the incubation phase. Making it harder to
> tell a unified story to the outside world...
> The Code of Conduct affects more the community aspect while being under the
> umbrella of the ASF than the code aspect. The Code of Conduct and the
> Apache Way (community over code) is foremost about how the contributors
> interact. About how to do just to all contributors, not how to favour a
> few....
> The bylaws of a project should reflect how that is done, meaning defining
> the rules regarding procedural matters (which culminates about how the
> project deals with onboarding and ofboarding of contributors visavis
> privileges - commit privileges, PMC, PMC Chair).
> And shouldn't the VP of the project report back to the board, in the
> projects regular report, about the progress? And shouldn't the board keep
> track of what it has task the project to do, and/or check that a project's
> bylaws doesn't conflict with the Code of Conduct or the Apache Way?
> Best regards,
> Pierre Smits
> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> Services and Retail & Trade
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <
> > wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > As there was no opposition I have modified the first few paragraphs of
> > as below.
> >
> > -Bertrand
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
> > <> wrote:
> > > *** reworked code of conduct intro section ***
> > > This code of conduct applies to all spaces managed by the Apache
> > > Software Foundation, including IRC, all public and private mailing
> > > lists, issue trackers, wikis, blogs, Twitter, and any other
> > > communication channel used by our communities. A code of conduct which
> > > is specific to in-person events (ie., conferences) is codified in the
> > > published ASF anti-harassment policy.
> > >
> > > We expect this code of conduct to be honored by everyone who
> > > participates in the Apache community formally or informally, or claims
> > > any affiliation with the Foundation, in any Foundation-related
> > > activities and especially when representing the ASF, in any role.
> > >
> > > This code is not exhaustive or complete....(unchanged from here on)
> > > *** reworked code of conduct intro section ***
> >

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message