community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [reporter] Confusing PMC/Committeer/Committee/LDAP report format
Date Sun, 18 Oct 2015 13:19:00 GMT
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