geode-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Chase <g...@gregchase.com>
Subject [DISCUSS] Generalized criteria for becoming an Apache Geode Committer
Date Thu, 07 Jan 2016 01:30:49 GMT
With the occasion of a request to vote in our first additional committer,
its become clear that we don't have clear criteria for when someone should
become a committer.

The steps for becoming a committer are listed here in the wiki:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Becoming+a+committer

And include these steps:


>    1. Once you become a contributor you *will probably be invited by*
>    another committer to be a new committer and *the community will vote*
>
>
>    1. *If the vote pass *and you get accepted...
>
>
But there are no criteria by which someone should be nominated, or by which
committers / PPMC should vote according to.

In a discussion on private@geode, a number of good points have been raised
which I will paraphrase.  The makers of these points can choose to weigh in
directly to this thread if they want their statement refined or attributed
to them.

1. "The Committers" are currently the same as "The PPMC".  So at this
point, voting someone as a committer is voting them as the potential future
PMC of Apache Geode.

2. Becoming a committer should be used to recognize a contributor as having
further potential to contribute even more, and to encourage them to
participate with and collaborate more with the community.

In my personal opinion, contributors who show themselves as collaborative,
community building, or supportive of users with a likelihood of
contributing even more should be nominated and likely voted by the PPMC to
be a contributor.

While not the only source, many behaviors related to being collaborative,
community building, or supportive of users is captured by our community
dashboard: http://projects.bitergia.com/apache-geode/browser/

Thus I'd expect high contributors in these areas to rank in top lists as
follows:

Collaborative:
Jiras: open, comment, close
Dev mail list: open threads, reply
Git: commits
Code reviews

Someone who does not collaborate and only develops would likely only show
up in pull requests, but not other collaborative infrastructure.

Community building would include:
Dev & user mail lists
Wiki / confluent editing

User supporting would incldue:
User mail list responses
Jiras opened and commented on

I'm sure these lists can be better refined.

While I wouldn't quantify this, I would argue that if someone shows up in
multiple categories of contribution on top lists for more than one 30 day
period, they are likely candidates to be nominated as a committer.

I know of at least a couple of companies that pay their employees to be
contributors to Apache Geode.  If their job changes, or they move to a
different company, will they stay as a contributor if we make them a
committer?  I'd argue this is much more likely if we see them contributing
in multiple categories rather than just a single way.

Finally, we need to create a model and standard of how we want our
community to act.  By being more specific about asking for broader
contribution to be recognized as a committer, this will help train new
members of this community how to participate fully.

I'll appreciate comments on these, and if I get enough agreement, I will
add a proposed criteria to the wiki.

Regards,

-Greg

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