hawq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Lei Chang <chang.lei...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: What's bar to be a HAWQ committer?
Date Mon, 28 Dec 2015 01:17:24 GMT
Hi Justin,

Thanks for the great suggestions and references.

I will add more information around sustained contributions for further
discussions.

Cheers
Lei


On Sun, Dec 27, 2015 at 4:31 AM, Justin Erenkrantz <justin@erenkrantz.com>
wrote:

> Hi Lei,
>
> I have two additional comments to add to what Roman and Cos already said.
>
> In the early stages of the Incubation process, it's probably better to
> err on the side of inclusion.  Especially given the early adoption of
> RTC, code contributions will be vetted.  Not everyone is going to be
> able work on HAWQ full-time - nor should that be a gatekeeper for
> commit access.  Chances are that folks who contribute at this early
> stage could be nurtured into being fantastic contributors.  As a
> mentor, this is one of the criteria I'd like to see before graduation
> - are projects accepting of contributors who show up and recognize
> them accordingly?
>
> I would also think it'd be a good idea to think - and document - what
> the definition of sustained contributions are.  While it doesn't have
> to be concrete (e.g. number of patches or months), there should be
> some guidance available.
>
> Subversion has some useful docs that may be worth perusing at:
>
> http://subversion.apache.org/contributing.html
> http://subversion.apache.org/docs/community-guide/roles.html#committers
>
> Cheers.  -- justin
>
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 9:30 PM, Lei Chang <chang.lei.cn@gmail.com> wrote:
> > @konstantin, concur with you on the contribution scope, not everyone can
> do
> > all of the things or want to do everything, contributors that have
> > contributed a lot to one area should be welcomed as a committer.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Lei
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 25, 2015 at 1:57 AM, Konstantin Boudnik <cos@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >> It's up to the community to decide what's the entry barrier, but here a
> few
> >> points to consider:
> >>  - not everybody worthy a committer-ship might be interested in doing
> the
> >>    whole laundry list below
> >>  - Apache projects are collectives of volunteers, contributing where
> there
> >>    want to and when they have time for it. Expecting every and each one
> of
> >>    them to cover 27 different areas of possible contributions will slow
> the
> >>    community growth to halt
> >>  - IIRC, this project decided to stick to RTC, which is proven to have a
> >>    slow-down effect on the participation rate, so be extra careful
> setting
> >>    such a high bar
> >>
> >> None of what I said means that sloppy coders or arrogant jack-asses
> should
> >> be
> >> welcomed with open arms. Say, there's someone who's doing great job in
> the,
> >> say, query optimization part of the project, helps others to understand
> >> his work and gives feedback to other contribution in the same area. If
> the
> >> same time the guy doesn't give a hoot about anything else in the
> project -
> >> he
> >> should be invited as a committer. But per the following guidelines, he
> >> would
> >> never be welcomed here.
> >>
> >> Something to think about, perhaps.
> >>   Cos
> >>
> >> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 02:50PM, Lei Chang wrote:
> >> > We do not have a finalized answer for this yet. I summarized the
> points
> >> > from previous discussions.
> >> >
> >> > There are no hard and fast rules, but here are a few things that
> >> typically
> >> > would prompt considering somebody a candidate for a committer
> >> >    1. participation in the mailing list conversations
> >> >    2. code contributions (patches submitted to JIRA or PRs) committed
> >> >    by existing committers
> >> >    3. documentation contributions
> >> >    4. wiki/social media contributions
> >> >    5. review of patches submitted by others
> >> >    6. reviews of release candidates
> >> >    7. bug reports
> >> >    8. work with peers collaboratively and potentially as a mentor to
> new
> >> > contributors
> >> >
> >> > More discussions are welcomed :-)
> >> >
> >> > Cheers
> >> > Lei
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Lei Chang <chang.lei.cn@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > > My thought is that a committer should be able to act as a mentor,
> work
> >> > > with peers collaboratively and contribute to the project
> continuously
> >> or a
> >> > > long time period.
> >> > >
> >> > > What do you guys think?
> >> > >
> >> > > Cheers
> >> > > Lei
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 6:38 AM, Roman Shaposhnik <
> roman@shaposhnik.org
> >> >
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> Lei, what are your thoughts on the required level of
> >> > >> contribution to be considered?
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Thanks,
> >> > >> Roman.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 11:57 PM, Lei Chang <chang.lei.cn@gmail.com
> >
> >> > >> wrote:
> >> > >> > add the link:
> >> > >> >
> http://community.apache.org/newcommitter.html#new-committer-process
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 3:57 PM, Lei Chang <
> chang.lei.cn@gmail.com>
> >> > >> wrote:
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >> Here is the common apache process for becoming a new
committer.
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >> Cheers
> >> > >> >> Lei
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >> On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Roman Shaposhnik <
> >> > >> roman@shaposhnik.org>
> >> > >> >> wrote:
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >>> Hi Xin!
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> this is a great question. Certainly this is something
that HAWQ
> >> > >> >>> community has to ponder soon enough. There are no
hard and
> >> > >> >>> fast rules, but here are a few things that typically
would
> prompt
> >> > >> >>> considering somebody a candidate for a committer:
> >> > >> >>>    1. participation in the mailing list conversations
> >> > >> >>>    2. code contributions (patches submitted to JIRA
or PRs)
> >> committed
> >> > >> >>>    by existing committers
> >> > >> >>>    3. documentation contributions
> >> > >> >>>    4. wiki/social media contributions
> >> > >> >>>    5. review of patches submitted by others
> >> > >> >>>    6. reviews of release candidates
> >> > >> >>>    7. bug reports
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> If the behavior of contributing to the project in
a variety of
> >> > >> different
> >> > >> >>> ways
> >> > >> >>> continues for a few months I think it is reasonable
to expect
> that
> >> > >> your
> >> > >> >>> merit should be considered as a basis for commitership.
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> Thanks,
> >> > >> >>> Roman.
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Xin Zhang <xzhang@pivotal.io>
> >> wrote:
> >> > >> >>> > Hi HAWQ devs,
> >> > >> >>> >
> >> > >> >>> > I recently started contributing to apache-hawq.
> >> > >> >>> >
> >> > >> >>> > I am wondering what's bar to be considered at
a committer,
> and
> >> > >> what's
> >> > >> >>> the
> >> > >> >>> > process to submit a request, and when PMC can
review the
> >> request.
> >> > >> >>> >
> >> > >> >>> > I am pretty new to OSS as well as this project,
and any
> >> guidance is
> >> > >> >>> greatly
> >> > >> >>> > appreciated.
> >> > >> >>> >
> >> > >> >>> > --
> >> > >> >>> > Thanks,
> >> > >> >>> > Shin
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >>
>

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