incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dan Diephouse <...@envoisolutions.com>
Subject Re: PPMCs [was Re: what are required for contributing to release management]
Date Sun, 01 Oct 2006 20:07:24 GMT
Dan Diephouse wrote:

> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>
>> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>>  
>>
>>> Noel J. Bergman <noel@devtech.com> wrote:
>>>   
>>>
>>>>>> I am pretty philosophically against making every committer PPMC
>>>>>>         
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> members.
>>>>>>>           
>>>>>>
>>>>> I don't agree at all.  If they contribute code, they merit a say in
>>>>>       
>>>>
>> the
>>  
>>
>>>>> direction of the project.
>>>>>       
>>>>
>>>> Are you reading Dan's statement as independent or dependent upon time?
>>>>     
>>>
>> I
>>  
>>
>>>> read it as an objection to mandated concurrency.  Over time, your view
>>>> should be the dominant one, as each Committer becomes a (P)PMC member.
>>>>     
>>>
>>> as for the one line that you retained: I view Dan's perspective as
>>> being independent of time - that is, committers should never equal
>>> the PMC - I view that as extremely unhealthy.
>>>   
>>
>>
>> If I had read it as you do, I would agree with you.  I read it as 
>> suggestive
>> of a process over time, and that at any snapshot in time, the body of
>> Committers might not be entirely present in the PPMC.
>>  
>>
> I did in fact mean it as dependent on time. And specifically I meant 
> at the beginning of incubation. I don't think every committer should 
> be on the PPMC from the outset. Every committer may be on the PPMC at 
> graduation, and this is encouraged, but only after they are explicitly 
> voted on by the existing PPMC members. Now the PPMC may just chose to 
> vote on specific individuals or everyone at once, its up to them. I 
> would however encourage only voting people in after they an 
> appropriate level of committment and involvement with the project.
>
One reason I feel this way is that I think protect's Apache's interests. 
Lets say that hypothetically, more people are put on a proposal than 
should be. If the PPMC members are elected after showing their 
committment to the long term health of the project, as opposed to all 
committers being added at the outset of the project, I believe this 
gives a better chance for correction. If I end up on the CXF (P)PMC I 
have every intention of starting a vote which removes any committers who 
have not contributed anything during incubation or significantly in the 
past.  I hope I don't have to do that, but it doesn't seem fair that 
they would graduate as part of the project and have as much say as those 
who have shown their committment. If someone wants to get involved 
later, they can always contribute and get voted back in. I think this 
gives people a slightly lower barrier to get involved, which seems 
befitting to incubation and starting of a project, but also provides 
corrective measures in case there are problems.

Cheers,
- Dan

-- 
Dan Diephouse
(616) 971-2053
Envoi Solutions LLC
http://netzooid.com


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message