Return-Path: 
 <ooo-dev-return-2456-apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org>
X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org
Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3])
	by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 37AEB6B6F
	for <apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org>;
 Sat, 23 Jul 2011 10:32:25 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 40484 invoked by uid 500); 23 Jul 2011 10:32:23 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org
Received: (qmail 39840 invoked by uid 500); 23 Jul 2011 10:32:07 -0000
Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ooo-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org>
List-Id: <ooo-dev.incubator.apache.org>
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Delivered-To: moderator for ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received: (qmail 20765 invoked by uid 99); 23 Jul 2011 06:11:27 -0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0
	tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: 203.97.33.64 is neither permitted
 nor denied by domain of g.a.lauder@gmail.com)
Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2011 18:13:02 +1200
From: Graham Lauder <g.a.lauder@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: RE: [DISCUSS] <Initial Committer>: Apache OpenOffice.org Initial
 Committer Status
In-reply-to: <016201cc48fb$cd5d80b0$68188210$@acm.org>
To: dennis.hamilton@acm.org
Cc: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Message-id: <1311401582.5481.2504.camel@linux-krcc.site>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.1.2
Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT
References: <018b01cc481c$e46a5600$ad3f0200$@apache.org>
 <BLU0-SMTP10302E6E8D3421D1EFC3026D94E0@phx.gbl>
 <010801cc48af$8f1cfca0$ad56f5e0$@acm.org>
 <CALRLYE=Qy6JLcK7RgCWskqV2=HnUwb_r7qurtj=fv-xmKo+QDQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <016201cc48fb$cd5d80b0$68188210$@acm.org>

On Fri, 2011-07-22 at 22:45 -0700, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> Let me ask the question in reverse: how long do you think that we should leave the door open, no questions asked?  Why?

Til July 31, because it's long enough in a completely arbitrary way.
Those dedicated to OOo and who have no problem signing the ICLA would
have done it by now in other than exceptional circumstances.  And as you
say it doesn't prevent them being invited to be comitters or on the PPMC
at a later date.  


> 
> Remember, Initial Committers are grandfathered in as committers and members of the PPMC without being here and demonstrating commitment through their contributions.  It is not even a matter of them being voted in based on existing reputation.  (I'm one of those myself.)
> 
> At some point, one wants to be complete with intake of initial committers and working toward a full-fledged meritocracy instead. I suspect it is possible that the PPMC will also shrink if those who are already on it do not eventually demonstrate a commitment that would have qualified them in the ordinary way.  
> 
> At what point does holding out that special status to those who have not shown up become a point too far.  In this case, we are talking about folks who have not submitted an iCLA and not responded to requests to submit them and, as far as I know, have not appeared on ooo-dev.  Even if we withdraw the Initial Committer invitations at some point, there is no barrier to becoming a contributor and demonstrating commitment to the project.  It's not fatal.
> 
> I propose to ask each of these absent Initial Committers whether they intend to submit an iCLA and how much time they want to do that.  It is a simple request.  There are any number of possible responses.  I assume we will deal with the responses on an individual basis.  If they do not intend to submit an iCLA, it would be useful to know, so we don't have to be expecting them, watching for the iCLA to arrive, etc.
> 
> My goal is having them show up.  And if they are not going to show up, I would like to know that.  Then we can tell when we have a full roster of Initial Committers that are ready and willing as they signaled they were.
>  
>  - Dennis



The Apache way is about lazy consensus, Yes?  Then lets work on a "lazy
consent", simply add the tag that outlines as above in brief:

"We thank you for your early support. We now have a working compliment
of PPMC members from the initial committers.  If you don't feel the need
to be on the PPMC or be a committer at this time, simply don't present
your ICLA before 31 July and you'll hear no more from us and we will
take that as read.  Of course this does not prevent you from becoming a
committer or being invited onto the PPMC at a later date."


Or something of that nature

Cheers
GL



> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wolf Halton [mailto:wolf.halton@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 20:32
> To: dennis.hamilton@acm.org; ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: RE: [DISCUSS] <Initial Committer>: Apache OpenOffice.org Initial Committer Status
> 
> What is the technical or social stressor causing this issue to be framed in
> this time-sensitive language?
> Wolf
> 
> On Jul 22, 2011 4:40 PM, "Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org>
> wrote:
> > I did not include a time limit, because we had not agreed on one. Instead,
> I made the request to indicate whether they intended to submit an iCLA and
> how much time they would need (for whatever review reasons or other
> determinations involved).
> >
> > These Initial Committers were already sent a bulk e-mail on June 23.
> >
> > Why would we not expect the Initial Committers who signed up by June 10 to
> report whether they intend to actually become committers? It is about their
> commitment, it seems to me. And they always have the opportunity to become
> committers by showing up and contributing, the same as for anyone who is not
> an Initial Committer.
> >
> > My thought was to wait 15-30 days after we approach all of them
> individually and then send a follow-up to ones who have not responded at all
> indicating that the invitation to become committers and PPMC members is
> being withdrawn. (Assuming we decide to do that and set such a date.)
> >
> > I would make the changes that Stephen Bergmann recommended.
> >
> > More feedback and discussion, please.
> >
> > - Dennis
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Juan C. Sanz [mailto:juancsanzc@hotmail.com]
> > Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 12:28
> > To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] <Initial Committer>: Apache OpenOffice.org Initial
> Committer Status
> >
> > El 22/07/2011 5:10, Dennis E. Hamilton escribió:
> >> There are 20 Initial Committers on the OpenOffice.org incubator proposal
> who have not yet submitted iCLAs or informed us of their intention not to do
> so.
> >>
> >> Today I used the following format for a message to one of those Initial
> Committers.
> >>
> >> Before 19 more of these are sent out I wanted to check how understandable
> this is.
> >>
> >> I am particularly concerned for how clear this is for those who are not
> native English speakers.
> >>
> >> I welcome your advice.
> >>
> >> - Dennis
> >>
> >> *** specimen message ***
> >>
> >> From:<PPMC member>
> >> Sent:<today>
> >> To:<Initial Committer lacking iCLA so far>
> >> Cc: ooo-private@incubator.apache.org
> >> Subject:<Initial Committer Name>: Apache OpenOffice.org Initial Committer
> Status
> >>
> >> Hello<Initial Committer Name>,
> >>
> >> You are listed as an Initial Committer on the proposal for the Apache
> OpenOffice.org incubator project.
> >>
> >> The incubator project was accepted by Apache on 2011-06-13.
> >>
> >> As an Initial Committer you are invited to be established as a committer
> on the Apache OpenOffice.org incubator podling. You are also invited to
> serve on the Podling Project Management Committee after you are established
> as a committer.
> >>
> >> The prerequisite to becoming established as a committer is to register an
> iCLA agreement with Apache.
> >>
> >> Our records indicate that no iCLA has been received from you.
> >>
> >> If you do not choose to submit an iCLA, please report your decision to<
> ooo-private@incubator.apache.org>. We will then know not wait for it.
> >>
> >> If you are submitting an iCLA, please report your decision to
> ooo-private@incubator.apache.org and indicate how much time you need before
> the iCLA will be sent to Apache.
> >>
> >> For more information and iCLA/CCLA forms, go to<
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/#clas>. Complete instructions for submission
> of an iCLA is at the top of the form (text or PDF).
> >>
> >> We welcome your contribution to the Apache OpenOffice.org incubator
> project.
> >>
> >> - the Apache OpenOffice.org incubator Podling Project Management
> Committee (PPMC)
> >>
> >> *** end of specimen message ***
> >>
> > I think it's understundandable. But, what is the next step? how long do
> > we wait for the user id?
> > Regards.
> > Juan C. Sanz
> >
>