community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>
Subject Re: [reporter] Confusing PMC/Committeer/Committee/LDAP report format
Date Mon, 19 Oct 2015 11:55:37 GMT
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 5:42 AM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 19 October 2015 at 06:58, Hervé BOUTEMY <herve.boutemy@free.fr> wrote:
>> ok, if you stay only on PMC composition information, please just remove the
>> LDAP part: this only adds confusion
>
> That's not what I am suggesting.
>
>> adding another section is useful if it's about another information: I thought
>> information about count of committers was useful (even if not always easy to
>> know which are the few TLPs who let every ASF committer commit)
>
> The LDAP unix group section is potentially useful for the board, as it
> may relate to changes in the committer roster.
> However, as you say, it does not apply to all TLPs.
> Also rarely are inactive committers removed.
> Maybe the best would be to include a note to this effect.

I see it as adding more confusion than insight.  And in any case, the
whimsy board agenda tool provides a direct link to the roster tool's
page for the PMC associated with the report which provides more than
raw numbers, as it will actually indicate what the differences are.
Here's an index of such pages:

https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/committee/

>> Regards,
>>
>> Hervé

- Sam Ruby

>> Le lundi 19 octobre 2015 01:22:37 sebb a écrit :
>>> On 19 October 2015 at 00:44, Hervé BOUTEMY <herve.boutemy@free.fr> wrote:
>>> >> ---------- cut here ----------
>>> >>
>>> >> ## PMC changes:
>>> >>  - Currently 42 PMC members listed in committee-info.txt.
>>> >>  - No new PMC members added in the last 3 months
>>> >>  - Last PMC addition was Dana Freeborn at Fri Mar 27 2015
>>> >>
>>> >> ## LDAP unix group changes:
>>> >>  - Currently 44 members
>>> >>  - Radu Manole was added on Tue Oct 06 2015
>>> >>
>>> >> ---------- cut here ----------
>>> >>
>>> >> Would that satisfy everyone?
>>> >
>>> > IMHO, making explicit which "LDAP unix group" is looked at would be useful
>>>
>>> There is only one LDAP unix group for each PMC.
>>>
>>> > Since I still don't understand if it's the committers group or PMC group
>>> > (I expect it to be the committers group)
>>>
>>> The committers group maintained using modify_unix_group.pl
>>>
>>> The committee group is maintained using modify_committee.pl
>>>
>>> > and if oodt-pmc LDAP does not have the same count as PMC members listed
in
>>> > committee-info.txt, a warning should be added in the first section
>>>
>>> Such a warning does not belong in the report to the board, so does not
>>> belong in the report template.
>>> It might be worth adding a warning to the previous LDAP section.
>>>
>>> > Regards,
>>> >
>>> > Hervé
>>> >
>>> > Le dimanche 18 octobre 2015 14:19:00 sebb a écrit :
>>> >> The app currently says for OODT:
>>> >>
>>> >> ---------- cut here ----------
>>> >>
>>> >> ## PMC changes:
>>> >>  - Currently 42 PMC members.
>>> >>  - No new PMC members added in the last 3 months
>>> >>  - Last PMC addition was Dana Freeborn at Fri Mar 27 2015
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>  - Currently 44 committers and 43 PMC members.
>>> >>  - Radu Manole was added to the PMC on Sun Oct 11 2015
>>> >>  - Radu Manole was added as a committer on Tue Oct 06 2015
>>> >>
>>> >> ---------- cut here ----------
>>> >>
>>> >> Note that there are either 42 or 43 PMC members. (*)
>>> >> I think the above is a lot more confusing than the previous version
which
>>> >> was:
>>> >>
>>> >> ---------- cut here ----------
>>> >>
>>> >> ## PMC changes:
>>> >>  - Currently 42 PMC members.
>>> >>  - No new PMC members added in the last 3 months
>>> >>  - Last PMC addition was Dana Freeborn at Fri Mar 27 2015
>>> >>
>>> >> ## LDAP changes:
>>> >>  - Currently 44 committers and 43 committee group members.
>>> >>  - Radu Manole was added to the committee group on Sun Oct 11 2015
>>> >>  - Radu Manole was added as a committer on Tue Oct 06 2015
>>> >>
>>> >> ---------- cut here ----------
>>> >>
>>> >> As I already wrote, there is now no reason for the LDAP committee
>>> >> changes to be listed in the board report.
>>> >>
>>> >> So what I propose is:
>>> >>
>>> >> ---------- cut here ----------
>>> >>
>>> >> ## PMC changes:
>>> >>  - Currently 42 PMC members listed in committee-info.txt.
>>> >>  - No new PMC members added in the last 3 months
>>> >>  - Last PMC addition was Dana Freeborn at Fri Mar 27 2015
>>> >>
>>> >> ## LDAP unix group changes:
>>> >>  - Currently 44 members
>>> >>  - Radu Manole was added on Tue Oct 06 2015
>>> >>
>>> >> ---------- cut here ----------
>>> >>
>>> >> Would that satisfy everyone?
>>> >>
>>> >> (*) that is because Radu has not yet been added to committee-info.txt
>>> >> so is not yet officially a member of the PMC
>>> >>
>>> >> On 18 October 2015 at 10:12, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> > On 18 October 2015 at 09:31, Hervé BOUTEMY <herve.boutemy@free.fr>
>> wrote:
>>> >> >> from my understanding:
>>> >> >> - PMC composition is available in 2 forms: committee-info.txt
(=
>>> >> >> golden
>>> >> >> source) and LDAP xxx-pmc group
>>> >> >
>>> >> > The *only* record of current PMC membership is committee-info.txt.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > The LDAP committee group (modify_committee.pl) is only used for
>>> >> > granting karma, e.g. to PMC-private SVN and dist/release.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > They should generally have the same members, since all (and perhaps
>>> >> > only) PMC members should have the karma.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > However this is not always the case, and it's important not to
confuse
>>> >> > the
>>> >> > two.>
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> - committers list is available only in LDAP as xxx group
>>> >> >
>>> >> > The LDAP unix group (modify_unix_group.pl) generally grants karma
to
>>> >> > SVN.
>>> >> > However not every PMC uses it - e.g. Commons and Subversion allow
any
>>> >> > ASF committer to commit.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> then instead of displaying:
>>> >> >> * PMC from committee-info
>>> >> >> * LDAP info: PMC + committers
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> it would be easier to understand if the structure was more:
>>> >> >> * PMC info from committee-info (and warning if LDAP PMC info
is not
>>> >> >> consistent)
>>> >> >
>>> >> > The consistency check is already done by Whimsy, but I suppose
it
>>> >> > could be repeated here.
>>> >> > Or the Whimsy page could be linked if there was a discrepancy.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> * committers info (no need to explain that it comes from LDAP)
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> WDYT?
>>> >> >
>>> >> > That is basically what it did say before the recent change.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Except that I do think it's necessary to explain that the committer
>>> >> > (modify_unix_group.pl) info is just an LDAP group.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > There is no direct relationship with committers on a project in
>>> >> > general.
>>> >> > Commons and Subversion don't use the group for commit karma.
>>> >> > Also it's relatively rare that people are dropped from the unix
group,
>>> >> > even if they have stopped contributing.
>>> >> > So the group does not have any bearing on the current committer
base.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Additions to the unix group generally are associated with new
>>> >> > committers, so that is probably worth reporting.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> Hervé
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Le vendredi 16 octobre 2015 23:24:16 sebb a écrit :
>>> >> >>> On 16 October 2015 at 21:08, Pierre Smits <pierre.smits@gmail.com>
>>> >
>>> > wrote:
>>> >> >>> > I feel confident that anybody objects to ambiguous
information, and
>>> >> >>> > that
>>> >> >>> > no
>>> >> >>> > one will object to improvement.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> I do object to conflating LDAP committee and PMC membership.
>>> >> >>> The two are completely distinct (although related).
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> This is why I changed the text to show LDAP committee rather
than PMC
>>> >> >>> a while back.
>>> >> >>> At the time, the tool did not analyse the actual PMC membership,
only
>>> >> >>> LDAP.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> However it does now, so the output shows them as distinct
items.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> The LDAP committee information is not really relevant to
the board,
>>> >> >>> so
>>> >> >>> could now be dropped from the report skeleton.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> But I think it is completely wrong to imply that changes
to the LDAP
>>> >> >>> committee group have any bearing on PMC membership.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> > Best regards,
>>> >> >>> >
>>> >> >>> > Pierre Smits
>>> >> >>> >
>>> >> >>> > *OFBiz Extensions Marketplace*
>>> >> >>> > http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
>>> >> >>> >
>>> >> >>> > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 8:20 PM, Rich Bowen <rbowen@rcbowen.com>
>>> >
>>> > wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> Although I acknowledge that the LDAP membership
and the project
>>> >> >>> >> membership
>>> >> >>> >> might be different in certain weird edge cases,
for the purpose of
>>> >> >>> >> actually
>>> >> >>> >> generating a board report, I find the current
formatting confuses
>>> >> >>> >> me
>>> >> >>> >> Every
>>> >> >>> >> Single Time.
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> Viz:
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> ## PMC changes:
>>> >> >>> >>  - Currently 10 PMC members.
>>> >> >>> >>  - No new PMC members added in the last 3 months
>>> >> >>> >>  - Last PMC addition was Jean-Fran=C3=A7ois Maury
at Mon Apr 07
>>> >> >>> >>  2014
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> ## LDAP changes:
>>> >> >>> >>  - Currently 26 committers and 10 committee group
members.
>>> >> >>> >>  - No new committee group members added in the
last 3 months
>>> >> >>> >>  - No new committers added in the last 3 months
>>> >> >>> >>  - Last committer addition was Lyor Goldstein
at Thu Apr 30 2015
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> So, I can tease out of that there's 26 committers,
and 10 PMC
>>> >> >>> >> members,
>>> >> >>> >> and
>>> >> >>> >> the latest additions were Jean Francois on April
7, and Lyor on
>>> >> >>> >> April
>>> >> >>> >> 30.
>>> >> >>> >> The rest of that phrasing is confusing to me.
committee vs
>>> >> >>> >> committer
>>> >> >>> >> and
>>> >> >>> >> LDAP vs ... whatever. Not sure.
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> Does anybody object to me reformatting this a
little, so that it
>>> >> >>> >> won't
>>> >> >>> >> confuse me next month?
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> --Rich
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> --
>>> >> >>> >> Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
>>> >> >>> >> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
>>

Mime
View raw message