incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Schaefer <joes...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Concerning Sentry: A disagreement over the Apache Way and graduation
Date Thu, 05 Nov 2015 06:07:17 GMT
Also, I'm not quite clear on what is meant by "running" a release.
Do you mean a committer not on the PMC functioned as Release Manager?
Normally someone who does that is sending a clear-cut signal that they
belong on the PMC, because all that work they are doing is being done on
behalf of
the PMC.  I consider it a highly awkward situation when a Release Manager
does
not have a binding vote on their own damned release (well for a normal PMC).


On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 12:44 AM, Joe Schaefer <joesuf4@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks Chris.  So what I'm saying is, instead of adopting the position
> that "we" have made up our minds on this matter well before joining the
> incubator, why not recognize that at this point your community now includes
> new committers and new community members following along for which their
> voices have not been heard from on this matter.  Once you recognize that
> the
> community has changed a bit, it makes sense to revisit a chestnut like
> this on-
> list.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 12:26 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) <
> chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>
>> +1 to the below.
>>
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
>> Chief Architect
>> Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398)
>> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
>> Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527
>> Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
>> WWW:  http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department
>> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Joe Schaefer <joesuf4@gmail.com>
>> Reply-To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org>
>> Date: Wednesday, November 4, 2015 at 8:49 PM
>> To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: Concerning Sentry: A disagreement over the Apache Way and
>> graduation
>>
>> >Just to contrast this with the IPMC itself, we discuss everything here,
>> >including past decisions.
>> >Almost everything that happens here is a community decision, and we try
>> to
>> >move with near
>> >unanimous consent.  It is generally hard to figure out what roles people
>> >have without some formal
>> >VOTE where people indicate a binding status on it.
>> >
>> >That is what you should aspire to on your dev list- it really shouldn't
>> >matter what roles people have
>> >unless we need to be looking at a release.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 11:37 PM, Joe Schaefer <joesuf4@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> This may sound a bit pedantic, but the "Sentry project" isn't capable
>> of
>> >> considering anything.
>> >> Either you are referring to a decision of the committers or the PPMC or
>> >> the community, all
>> >> of which requires some discussion over time about any position being
>> >> taken.  I would consider
>> >> it unusual for the project participants to be unanimous on a situation
>> >> like this or other related
>> >> matters, and certainly opinions evolve over time.
>> >>
>> >> Nobody should put themselves in a position of speaking on behalf of the
>> >> project.  That is why
>> >> we have communication channels in the first place and generally refer
>> to
>> >> on list decisions.
>> >> The individual positions of the participants should be reflected in any
>> >> consensus-based decision
>> >> making.  Not to say everything must be voted on, but collective
>> decision
>> >> making requires
>> >> open communication, preferably on public channels.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 8:26 PM, Lenni Kuff <lskuff@cloudera.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> I think there is some confusion here. The Sentry project has never
>> >>> considered Committer == PMC. The recent website change was only to
>> help
>> >>> clarify the roles of each of the members of the project, it was not
>> the
>> >>> result of any decision being made.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks,
>> >>> Lenni
>> >>>
>> >>> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 3:03 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgoetz@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On Nov 4, 2015, at 2:05 PM, Lenni Kuff <lskuff@cloudera.com>
wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > >> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 10:05 AM, P. Taylor Goetz
>> >>><ptgoetz@gmail.com>
>> >>> > >> wrote:
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >>>
>> >>> > >>> On Nov 4, 2015, at 11:32 AM, Joe Brockmeier <jzb@zonker.net>
>> >>>wrote:
>> >>> > >>>
>> >>> > >>> * I would invite folks with access to go to Sentry's
private
>> list
>> >>> and
>> >>> > >>> look over discussions about adding new contributors,
and
>> >>>discussions
>> >>> > >>> about the project in general.
>> >>> > >>>
>> >>> > >>>
>> >>> > >>> I took a look.
>> >>> > >>>
>> >>> > >>> From a community growth perspective, I see them adding
new
>> >>> committers,
>> >>> > >>> which is a good thing. What I don’t see is any discussion
at all
>> >>> about
>> >>> > >>> adding PPMC members, nor any discussion about why
they chose to
>> >>>go
>> >>> the
>> >>> > >>> Committer != PPMC route.
>> >>> > >>>
>> >>> > >>> In a thread related to the first new committer being
added [1],
>> >>>it
>> >>> is
>> >>> > >>> pointed out that the podling website stated that Sentry
was
>> >>> Committer
>> >>> > ==
>> >>> > >>> PMC, but that the new member vote was only for Committer.
At
>> that
>> >>> point
>> >>> > >> it
>> >>> > >>> looks like the website was updated to reflect Committer
!= PMC.
>> >>>From
>> >>> > that
>> >>> > >>> point on, all new member votes were for Committer
only, and
>> there
>> >>> were
>> >>> > no
>> >>> > >>> discussions regarding adding new PMC members or promoting
>> >>> committers to
>> >>> > >> the
>> >>> > >>> PMC role.
>> >>> > >>>
>> >>> > >>> What I find slightly disconcerting is that there doesn’t
seem to
>> >>>be
>> >>> any
>> >>> > >>> consideration or discussion around growing the PPMC
and why
>> >>>that’s
>> >>> > >>> important. Sure they have 20-odd PPMC members from
the initial
>> >>> > committers
>> >>> > >>> list, so it would take a pretty large exodus to render
the
>> >>>project
>> >>> > unable
>> >>> > >>> to function, but I don’t see anything to indicate
that they
>> >>> understand
>> >>> > >> the
>> >>> > >>> function and importance of growing the PPMC.
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > Background: I am a Sentry community member.
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > I would have to disagree with this. We have identified lack
of new
>> >>> PPMC
>> >>> > > members as an issue and called out in our board reports. We
are
>> >>>also
>> >>> > > encouraging non-PPMC members to get involved in ways they
can
>> >>>become
>> >>> PPMC
>> >>> > > members - for example, we have had non-PPMC members run two
of the
>> >>> last
>> >>> > > Sentry releases. As mentioned earlier, it's not like there
is no
>> >>> progress
>> >>> > > here, we have people who are very close (and I agree that
we can
>> >>>do a
>> >>> > > better job discussing this on or private@ list). We are  also
>> >>> > encouraging
>> >>> > > others in the community to step up, giving them opportunities,
and
>> >>> really
>> >>> > > striving to build a community around the project.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Fair enough.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Can you point me to the discussion where the project decided to
go
>> >>>with
>> >>> > Committer != PMC over Committer == PMC?
>> >>> >
>> >>> > From an outsider's perspective, that decision just looks like a
>> >>>single
>> >>> > commit, without any public discussion, which speaks to the concerns
>> >>> others
>> >>> > have raised about decisions being made in private.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > -Taylor
>> >>> >
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> >>> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>

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