forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Crossley <cross...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] draft Forrest Project Guidelines: Roles and responsibilities
Date Thu, 01 Jul 2004 16:15:58 GMT
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Dave Brondsema wrote:
> ...
> > I am satisfied with the roles and responsibilities, except where they are
> > related to moving from one role to another (i.e. voting).  Let's move on
> > to discussing those areas.
> > 
> > From Committers, "After a successful vote,".  A successful vote by whom?
> > 
> > From PMC, "While they are active, they are part of the PMC".  I think this
> > is a little unclear.  Committers can join and disjoin from the PMC
> > whenever they want?  Mailing list membership is the indicator of PMC
> > membership?  We should also mention what the PMC does when a
> > committer joins/disjoins it (from David's recent email: "acking you with
> > board@ and adding you to the committee list").  Does that just mean
> > approve his/her subscription to the mailing list?  Or is the "committee
> > list" something else?
> 
> There is a lot of confusion on this :-)
> 
> The PMC is the core group of committers of a project, that take 
> decisions for the project and maintain it. They live on the *dev* list, 
> but have a private list solely for sensitive issues that they can use, 
> called the *pmc* list (a better name would be *private*).

Yes, very rarely used - discussion is encouraged to be on dev@

> The committers are just developers that can commit and participate in 
> discussions. By committing code and discussing, they are implicitly 
> making day2day decisions for the projece.
> 
> The developers are like committers but without commit access: all their 
> work goes through patches.

Wonderful words - we will add them to a doc somewhere.

> >>>Also, wouldn't it be better just to refer to the main
> >>>Apache document for this, and just clarify some points?
> >>
> >>That might be possible (though that main document needs
> >>some enhancements). However most other projects seem
> >>to also define the roles in their Guidelines. Another
> >>issue is that we are defining an extra role that no other
> >>project uses yet.
> > 
> > What extra role?  I see user, developer, committer, and PMC on our page
> > and on the ASF roles page.
> > 
> > A standalone document is nice, but some more lengthy issue explanations
> > (like defining voting) can just be referenced.  And then we specify in our
> > document how voting is used for Forrest.
> 
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/roles.html
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html
> 
> Is there a reason why we can't simply reference these documents and just 
> add a section about voting guidelines? If there are things that are not 
> ok we can discuss them on community@apache.org.

We can't reference, because there is this extra role that we
have added. (I am behind in email but things are getting much
better later in this thread - role distinction is reducing.)

> Better yet, I would also add a voting page to the main Apache site that 
> explains voting, moving it from the Incubator site.
> 
> http://incubator.apache.org/learn/voting.html
> 
> In this way we have only to decide how the voting has to occur for us, 
> and all others are the usual Apache docs.

Finally. This has been needed for a long time. I have
often wondered how i could help it to happen. Should
the docs be moved or should the Incubator get more
prominence?

I think the latter, because everyone needs to be incubated.
There is a lot of stuff that i groped in the dark with on
my journey through user, dev, committer, ... we all did.

-- 
David Crossley


Mime
View raw message