Mailing-List: contact dev-help@hawq.incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@hawq.incubator.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: justin.erenkrantz@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAE44UQeAPD=EL6Usf_JJaC39jYdH4b5_zJKhPzWVU9E2pn0Fzg@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CABrsG8jb4xjBuCd8mJgP2xaCcrow_aPuV4-=tFGGBKTX_ojwgg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+ULb+v2YnSbFXgM_Vhi1CD5LD=f8uOxqfeLb6zDDuV2Web3Fw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAE44UQdSS8MMrwuKd+AfE6EcpY6nNn-tPc7NxJSWJLm-emG=Kw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAE44UQcKBjDWE5=QO2zDNheiCNdUmyrKKRE6fBV-9V1c=qfqsg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+ULb+v8fwLs2RfnCc6=g3G0v137YhXsaKzEfuFqb8nVrnMSkg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAE44UQeAq6juV-X437ajo2yCTZNFKWQH3va1NrLb+YzyvAs-Fg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAE44UQd_r4N+btp7jOr6TQA9THz5g8EwiSJNRy1BACQ9rQkitw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20151224175718.GQ10680@tpx>
	<CAE44UQeAPD=EL6Usf_JJaC39jYdH4b5_zJKhPzWVU9E2pn0Fzg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2015 15:31:34 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CAOGLoJPvWA6UDccKXSTTVDhMgrfkHDFVfZ37Li2AEQyJd1dKaw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: What's bar to be a HAWQ committer?
From: Justin Erenkrantz <justin@erenkrantz.com>
To: dev@hawq.incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

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
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > >
>>