incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <>
Subject Re: How do we want to announce new Committers/PPMC members
Date Thu, 29 Sep 2011 18:14:11 GMT
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Donald Whytock <> wrote:
> Looking at the AOO "people" page
> ( I see "some of
> our contributors".  Is this a list of committers?  If so, perhaps new
> committers can be announced along the lines of, "The OpenOffice list
> of Committers at <URL> has updated with the addition of <name>."  Less
> laudatory, more PSA.
> If that list on the site isn't of committers, should it be?  Or should
> there be one, with "other contributors" mentioned?

The authoritative list of committers is here:

That has been silently updated as new committers have been elected.

As for the other page [2], it has many committers, but also some
mentors, and other contributors.  It is not maintained by the PPMC.
People are free to add themselves.

Apache makes a distinction between  "contributor" (synonymous with
"developer") and "committer".   A "contributor" is as "a user who
contributes to a project in the form of code or documentation. They
take extra steps to participate in a project, are active on the
developer mailing list, participate in discussions, provide patches,
documentation, suggestions, and criticism." [1]

So all committers are contributors, but not all contributors are (yet)



> Don
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Rob Weir <> wrote:
>> A recent press article suggested that this project had not had any new
>> committers since the project started.  This is false. But it would be
>> hard to tell that, looking at our mailing list or website.
>> So far we've been quiet about new committers.  We have the votes,
>> process the paper work, etc., on the ooo-private list.
>> Some Apache projects announce each new committer to their main mailing
>> list.  Others don't.   We're received mixed advice from our mentors.
>> IMHO, we want to avoid two errors, at the extremes:
>> 1) A public announcement note for new committers that is read as being
>> too congratulatory, one that makes those who are not committers (or
>> not yet committers) feel less appreciated.
>> 2) Total lack of any acknowledgement of new committers/PPMC that leads
>> observers to believe that new committers are chosen in a secret
>> ceremony involving ceremonial robes, oaths, and animal sacrifices.
>> An announcement of a new committer should not be surprising.  It
>> should confirm what any regular observer of the mailing list already
>> knows, namely that person X is actively involved in the project and is
>> making high quality contributions. So on one hand, acknowledging a new
>> committer should not tell you anything that you don't already know.
>> On the other hand, there is reinforcement value to stating what we
>> know, especially for newer members of the project, i.e., the project's
>> future committers.
>> By analogy, I've worked in situations where job promotions were given
>> secretly, and people were shy to ever speak of them.  It suggested
>> that the company could not bear the scrutiny of seeing the inequity of
>> hoiw promotions were given out.  And I've worked places where
>> promotions were announced widely, with a summary of the person's
>> recent contributions, reinforcing to the entire team the kinds of
>> contributions that could get them -- some day -- a similar promotion.
>> If we believe that we're doing a good job at selecting new committers
>> then we should want this to be known.  Transparency shows the fairness
>> of the process.
>> Obviously the context here at Apache is not the same.  But I think the
>> choices are analogous.
>> Personally, I'm in favor of a modest announcement to the ooo-dev list
>> after a new committer has been elected and have submitted the iCLA.
>> What do you think?
>> -Rob

View raw message