incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Leo Simons <m...@leosimons.com>
Subject Re: PPMC guidance on new committers
Date Sun, 03 Jun 2007 23:52:52 GMT
Thanks Craig. Some suggestions/comments:

On May 31, 2007, at 7:56 AM, Craig L Russell wrote:
> Voting in a new committer
>
> If a developer has contributed a significant number of high-quality  
> patches, is interested in continuing the contribution, and has  
> demonstrated the ability to work well with others under the Apache  
> guidelines, the project might vote to grant that developer commit  
> access. See the ASF How it Works document, which explains  
> meritocracy and roles.

Rewrite: If someone has made significant contributions and is  
interested in continuing to contribute, and works well under apache  
guidelines, the project might vote to grant that person commit  
access. See the ASF How it Works document, which explains meritocracy  
and roles.

[non-code contributions can lead to committership]

> One of the PPMC members should lead the process of accepting a new  
> committer. For the purposes of this document, the proposing PPMC  
> member is referred to as the proposer, and the proposed committer  
> is referred to as the nominee. Discussion of a nominee should take  
> place on the podling project's private (PPMC) list [normally it  
> would take place on a project's private list]. If there are any  
> concerns raised during the discussion, these need to be resolved so  
> that there is consensus among the PPMC members as to the  
> suitability of the nominee for the project and for Apache.

Add: Many projects adopt an approach where, if there are *any*  
concerns, the nomination is simply tabled for a few months. Many  
concerns often go away with continued participation.

> After vetting the nominee, the vote can be called on either one of  
> the two places listed below (notice the balance between private and  
> public lists):
>
> o The podling's private list, with notice posted to the Incubator  
> private list. The notice is a separate email forwarding the vote  
> email with a cover statement that this vote is underway on the  
> podling's private list. This is a good approach if you are not sure  
> of getting the required three +1 votes from incubator PMC members  
> on the first vote. After completing the vote on the PPMC list, if  
> there are not three +1 votes from incubator PMC members, the  
> proposer should call a vote on the incubator PMC private list with  
> a reference to the archived discussion and vote by the PPMC.

Add: Many projects that have these private votes also have a pro  
forma public vote after the private vote completes, or have a welcome  
thread on their public mailing list. Those are good because they make  
people feel welcome.

> o The podling's developer list, with notice posted to the Incubator  
> general list. The notice is a separate email forwarding the vote  
> email with a cover statement that this vote is underway on the  
> podling's developer list. This is a good approach if you are sure  
> of getting the required three +1 votes from incubator PMC members.  
> It is embarrassing to have a public vote fail or take a very long  
> time because not enough incubator PMC members vote and have to be  
> solicited to vote for a committer.

[Just a note here - a lot of IPMC people feel strongly that any  
voting on people in public is bad; I'm one of them. However, it is  
probably still an active practice somewhere at apache and I don't  
think we should quite forbid it, so it should be in this guide.]

Replace: o The podling's developer list, with notice posted to the  
Incubator general list. The notice is a separate email forwarding the  
vote email with a cover statement that this vote is underway on the  
podling's developer list.

Add: The second approach is considered inferior by many, because it  
is embarrassing to have a public vote like this fail or take a very  
long time. Consider holding a vote on a private mailing list followed  
by a public vote after consensus is evident.

> Only votes cast by Incubator PMC members are binding.

Add: However, votes from the PPMC are really important here. The  
entire PPMC should show their support for this new committer

> If the vote is positive (three or more binding +1 votes and no  
> binding -1 votes), the proposer offers committership to the  
> nominee. If the nominee accepts the responsibility of a committer  
> for the project,

Replace: "of a committer for the project with "of being a committer  
on the project"

> the nominee formally becomes an Apache committer. The proposer then  
> asks an Incubator PMC member to follow the documented procedures to  
> complete the process.
>
> If the nominee is already an Apache committer on another project,  
> the proposer asks the incubator PMC chair

Replace: "incubator PMC chair" with "incubator PMC"

> to update the authorization file to include the nominee as a  
> committer on the podling. If the nominee is not already an Apache  
> committer, the incubator PMC member CC's both the Incubator PMC and  
> the PPMC when sending the necessary e-mails to root. Normally, the  
> incubator PMC member is a Mentor on the podling's PPMC but due to  
> unavailability,

Replace: "due to unavaiability" with "if the mentors are temporarily  
unavailable"

> the proposer can ask any incubator PMC member.
>
> The proposer then directs the new committer to the Apache  
> developer's pages, to the Apache Incubator site, and to the  
> Incubator Committers Guide for important additional information.


cheers,


Leo


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


Mime
View raw message