hawq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gregory Chase <gch...@pivotal.io>
Subject Re: What's bar to be a HAWQ committer?
Date Thu, 07 Jan 2016 01:48:03 GMT
This discussion just came up in Apache Geode as well, and I suggested the
following:

<snip>

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 [HAWQ].
>


> 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-hawq/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 include:
> 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 [HAWQ].  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.
>


Regards,

-Greg

On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Caleb Welton <cwelton@pivotal.io> wrote:

> Good suggestion, updated along with a couple other little adjustments for
> clarity and excess redundancy.  The last paragraph could still use a bit
> more work.
>
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 4:47 AM, Justin Erenkrantz <justin@erenkrantz.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the writeup.  One minor suggestion:
> >
> > Code contributions (patches submitted to JIRA or PRs) committed by
> > existing committers.
> >
> > I would probably rephrase as "merged by" - the use of commit
> > everywhere gets a bit confusing if you don't understand the process.
> >
> > Cjeers.  -- justin
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 10:31 PM, Lei Chang <chang.lei.cn@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > Greetings.
> > >
> > > I have added a page that summarizes all the discussions so far for any
> > > further comments.
> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/HAWQ/Becoming+a+committer
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > Lei
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 9:17 AM, Lei Chang <chang.lei.cn@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> 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
> > >>> >> > >> >>>
> > >>> >> > >> >>
> > >>> >> > >> >>
> > >>> >> > >>
> > >>> >> > >
> > >>> >> > >
> > >>> >>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>



-- 
Greg Chase

Director of Big Data Communities
http://www.pivotal.io/big-data

Pivotal Software
http://www.pivotal.io/

650-215-0477
@GregChase
Blog: http://geekmarketing.biz/

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