incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig L Russell <Craig.Russ...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: PPMC guidance on new committers
Date Wed, 30 May 2007 13:13:07 GMT
Hi Dims,

It wasn't completely clear from my message, but I intended this to be  
a choice of the PPMC (with guidance by the Mentors) to hold the votes  
either in private or in public.

I'd like to get others' input as well on whether the guidance here  
should be

1. private vote on PPMC then private vote on incubator PMC

2. public vote on dev then public vote on incubator general

3. PPMC/Mentors decide which of 1 or 2 to follow. This might be a  
podling "policy" or decided on each [DISCUSS] of a new committer.

Craig

On May 30, 2007, at 5:59 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:

> 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
>

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!


Mime
View raw message