incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Rules of voting for new committers and PPMC members
Date Mon, 04 Jun 2012 01:28:34 GMT


Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 3, 2012, at 5:18 PM, Kay Schenk <kay.schenk@gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> On 06/03/2012 11:48 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>> FWIW,
>> 
>> The Foundation Roles are explained here:
>> 
>> http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#roles
> 
> yes, this is standard ASF policy.
> 
> My question/concern at this point would be --
> 
> how well do we think this works for Apache OpenOffice?

The PPMC has had the practice of making Committers into PPMC members on the same VOTE. This
is the practice for some Apache projects, but not all. I think that from now on this project
should always have separate votes as a matter of policy.

What do others think?

Regards,
Dave


> 
>> 
>> Pretty much in line to what you are thinking.
>> 
>> Pedro.
>> 
>> --- Dom 3/6/12, Yong Lin Ma<mayongl@gmail.com>  ha scritto:
>> 
>>> This was a discussion about rules of
>>> voting for new committer and PPMC
>>> member. We think it is more appropriate to let all
>>> contributors get
>>> involved in this. So I moved the discussion to ooo-dev.
>>> 
>>> General process about voting in a new committer and PPMC
>>> member is here
>>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html
>>> 
>>> By far the practice is most candidates were voted for
>>> committer and
>>> PPMC member at the same time.
>>> And no concreate critrial defined in public for AOO.
>>> 
>>> Your comments are welcomed.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> A comment from Rob:
>>> 
>>>> If it were entirely up to me I'd have it be like:
>>> 
>>>> 1) Contributor -- anyone who contributes to the project,
>>> mailing list
>>> discussions, patches, translations, bug reports, doc,
>>> support.� This
>>> comes in all flavors and sizes.� We need to do a better
>>> job giving
>>> them credit and acknowledging their contributions.� If
>>> the feeling is
>>> that someone is not valued unless they are voted in as a
>>> PPMC member,
>>> then we're doing something wrong.
>>> 
>>>> 2) Committer -- The threshold question:� Do we
>>> trust their judgement
>>> with respect to the area of their contributions?� The
>>> move from
>>> contributor to committer is a move from RTC (patches must be
>>> reviewed)
>>> to CTR.� So we really need to have a sense that they
>>> are doing quality
>>> work.� Committers also have veto rights on all of our
>>> commits.� So we
>>> need to trust their judgement.
>>> 
>>>> 3) PMC member -- The threshold question:� Do they
>>> understand The
>>> Apache Way and our community-based decision making? On
>>> average are
>>> they solving more community problems than they are
>>> causing?� Are they
>>> helping others in the community succeed?� When we
>>> graduate, and our
>>> Mentors move on to other podlings, the PMC collectively
>>> needs to
>>> mentor new members to the project.� So I think the PMC
>>> is more about
>>> trusting their community skills rather than their technical
>>> skills.
>>> 
>>>> It might be possible for someone to qualify for 2 and 3
>>> at the same
>>> time.� But probably not in every case.
>>> 
>>>> Note:� This is not how we have operated
>>> previously.� I think there was
>>> an bootstrapping issue where we needed to have a PPMC
>>> suitably large
>>> and diverse to provide balance.� We also obviously
>>> started with a PPMC
>>> consisting of people who did not fully understand
>>> Apache.� That is the
>>> nature of Incubation.� But I don't think this approach
>>> is necessarily
>>> something we should continue with a year later, as we
>>> approach
>>> graduation.
>>> 
> 
> -- 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
> 
> "So let it rock, let it roll
> Let the bible belt come and save my soul
> Hold on to sixteen as long as you can
> Changes come around real soon make us woman and men."
>          -- "Jack and Diane", John Mellencamp

Mime
View raw message