harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [discussion] Committer Addition Process
Date Tue, 20 Sep 2005 14:39:22 GMT

On Sep 20, 2005, at 10:25 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:

> Geir,
>
> Am looking for specific timelines and specific things an indiviual can
> do to make sure that they catch the eye of the PMC/PPMC for commit
> status.

Offer a patch or contribution.  That's pretty specific.

> For a person looking from outside, there is no info on what
> they should do (other than what they are doing right now) to become a
> committer.

You are correct, and it's something I'm trying to resolve now.

>
> +1 to make a policy doc in svn. But am really interested in getting
> the ball rolling on voting specific people, get them commit access AND
> more importantly getting out of their way and let them decide/work on
> harmony's future.

Two things - this is not just a policy doc.  it's how we will  
behave.  Second, it's not a "them", it's "us", at least for me :)

geir

>
> thanks,
> dims
>
> On 9/20/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geirm@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I'm going to shameless steal an idea from Andy Oliver.  Amended with
>> #4 :
>>
>> 1) Anyone with a contribution that would belong in SVN can be
>> considered for commit status by the PMC (PPMC while in incubation).
>> This contribution can be anything - new code, a patch to existing
>> code, documentation, a change to the website, testing code or other
>> resources, etc. (Hopefully this gets people interested in harvesting
>> good docs from the WIKI, as that's worth commit status IMO)
>>
>> 2) If offered commit status by the PMC and accepted by the
>> individual, we will get an ACQ from the individual along with an ICLA
>> if not already on file with the ASF secretary.  I'd ask that
>> individuals wait to do an ACQ until offered, as the ACQ will be
>> evolving over time as we learn, and I'd like to ask that a new
>> committer have the current version on file as of the date of them
>> being added as a commmitter.
>>
>> 3) The individual would be given free reign in the area to which they
>> contributed, and trusted to engage with the relevant part of the
>> community for other areas of our codebase/resourcebase.
>>
>> 4) A committer will lose commit status after 4 months of inactivity.
>> In order to regain commit status, that person must begin
>> participating by offering a patch, new code, etc :)
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sep 20, 2005, at 10:07 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Adding committers to a project is a problem every project faces,
>>> and there are quite a large number of ways to do it.  I've been too
>>> worried about legal issues (and they pop up often) lately, and this
>>> is a good subject for us to resolve now.
>>>
>>> We must
>>>
>>> * have a visible process to ensure fairness
>>> * a low barrier to entry to get people helping
>>> * a rigid transparent process to ensure safety of the codebase in
>>> terms of IP provenance
>>> * a cultural standard through which people work on things that they
>>> have demonstrated competence to the rest of the community.
>>>
>>> For the last point, except for keeping people away from parts of
>>> the subversion repository to which they have had prior exposure
>>> they can't get resolved, we want to have one kind of committer.
>>> However, it's clear that we all have different levels of talent in
>>> different areas of technology.  So a nice way to work - I think -
>>> is that committers are added for work in a specific area on a trust
>>> basis, and if they want to work in other areas, they engage with
>>> others already working there and get informal approval to commit at
>>> will.  IOW, don't just go rummaging through code in which you have
>>> no experience, but work with those that are.  This is something
>>> that I've heard work well in projects like Subversion, and we're
>>> trying it in Geronimo to recognize that the barrier to entry varies
>>> by person and technology they are interested in working on.
>>>
>>> So I'd like to keep it really simple :
>>>
>>> 1) Anyone with a contribution that would belong in SVN can be
>>> considered for commit status by the PMC (PPMC while in
>>> incubation).  This contribution can be anything - new code, a patch
>>> to existing code, documentation, a change to the website, testing
>>> code or other resources, etc. (Hopefully this gets people
>>> interested in harvesting good docs from the WIKI, as that's worth
>>> commit status IMO)
>>>
>>> 2) If offered commit status by the PMC and accepted by the
>>> individual, we will get an ACQ from the individual along with an
>>> ICLA if not already on file with the ASF secretary.  I'd ask that
>>> individuals wait to do an ACQ until offered, as the ACQ will be
>>> evolving over time as we learn, and I'd like to ask that a new
>>> committer have the current version on file as of the date of them
>>> being added as a commmitter.
>>>
>>> 3) The individual would be given free reign in the area to which
>>> they contributed, and trusted to engage with the relevant part of
>>> the community for other areas of our codebase/resourcebase.
>>>
>>> Comments?  If people agree to this, I'd like to add this to our
>>> website as part of the project policy.
>>>
>>> geir
>>>
>>> --
>>> Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
>>> geirm@apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
>> geirm@apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service  
> Platform
>
>

-- 
Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org



Mime
View raw message