incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Davanum Srinivas" <dava...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: PPMC guidance on new committers
Date Wed, 30 May 2007 12:59:32 GMT
I like the second option. thanks for bringing this up.

thanks,
dims

On 5/30/07, Craig L Russell <Craig.Russell@sun.com> wrote:
> I'd like to open the discussion on the "best practice" referred to by
> the guides/ppmc because I'm not convinced that best practice for a
> TLP is best practice for the incubator.
>
> The reason is that PPMC votes have no legal status. And incubator PMC
> members generally don't track podlings closely. So it's difficult to
> get incubator PMC members to vote for new committers.
>
> But incubator PMC members should be very good at looking at PPMC
> processes and voting based on the PPMC vote process.
>
> Personally, if I saw a vote on the incubator private PMC list for a
> new committer on a podling, including references to the PPMC
> discussion and vote, I would be inclined to vote for that committer.
> On the other hand, if I saw a vote on the incubator private PMC list
> that just offered the usual so-and-so is a great contributor, I'd
> have no real way to see if the PPMC was really learning its job.
>
> So IMHO, best practice for podlings is to hold a [DISCUSS] Joe Bleau
> for committer on the PPMC private list, followed by a [VOTE] on the
> PPMC private list, and then a formal [VOTE] on the private incubator
> PMC list with references to the discussion and vote of the PPMC.
> [Only the final vote is binding.]
>
> Alternatively, hold a [DISCUSS] Joe Bleau for committer on the PPMC
> private list, followed by a [VOTE] on the dev list, and then a formal
> [VOTE] on the incubator list with references to the discussion and
> vote of the community.
>
> This way, the incubator PMC can see that the PPMC "gets" the Apache Way.
>
> Craig
>
> On May 30, 2007, at 5:35 AM, Craig L Russell wrote:
>
> > Having seen this identical discussion at least half a dozen times,
> > I've committed changes to the guides/ppmc document removing the
> > distracting (P) from the discussion on new committers.
> >
> > The new text says
> >
> > Only votes cast by Incubator PMC members are binding. If the vote
> > is positive, and the contributor accepts the responsibility of a
> > committer for the project, the contributor formally becomes an
> > Apache committer. An Incubator PMC member should then follow the
> > documented procedures to complete the process, and CC both the
> > Incubator PMC and the PPMC when sending the necessary e-mails to root.
> >
> > I included the redundant "Incubator" in "Incubator PMC" simply to
> > reinforce Noel's comment that PMC means Incubator PMC.
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > On May 29, 2007, at 8:49 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> >
> >> Yoav Shapira wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> I voted +0, not having had time to review the proposed committer's
> >>> contributions.
> >>
> >> +1 != +0
> >>
> >>> I always thought (and the documentation at
> >>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html) says PPMC votes are
> >>> binding.
> >>
> >> It says (P), and the (P) clearly does not belong.  Notice that
> >> elsewhere it
> >> properly says PPMC, with no (), and the places that are wrong were
> >> PMC to
> >> which someone added (P).  Likewise "IPMC" should simply be PMC.
> >> There is
> >> only one PMC: the Incubator PMC.
> >>
> >> I don't know how to say this more clearly.  The PPMC is not a
> >> recognized
> >> entity in the ASF Bylaws.  The PMC is the legal entity, and only
> >> PMC votes
> >> count in any ASF project.  PPMC members should still vote, as can
> >> other
> >> members of the community, but as a legal matter, only PMC votes
> >> are binding.
> >> This is not Incubator policy, it is how the ASF works.
> >>
> >> It is the same in Jakarta, for example, where any Jakarta
> >> Committer who
> >> isn't on the PMC can vote, but only Jakarta PMC votes count.  For
> >> years
> >> people didn't understand this, but please understand that Jakarta
> >> is the
> >> source of many of the wrong and bad practices in ASF projects that
> >> didn't go
> >> through either the HTTP Server project or the Incubator.
> >>
> >>> the documentation link above is out of date.
> >>
> >> It was never "in date".  It is wrong, regardless of date.
> >>
> >>      --- Noel
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >>
> >
> > Craig Russell
> > Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
> > 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
> > P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
> >
>
> Craig Russell
> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
>
>


-- 
Davanum Srinivas :: http://davanum.wordpress.com

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


Mime
View raw message