mxnet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tianqi Chen <tqc...@cs.washington.edu>
Subject Re: Formalize Committer Proposal and Application Procedure
Date Fri, 04 Aug 2017 15:37:02 GMT
FYI here is the comitter checklist from Apache Mesos
http://mesos.apache.org/documentation/latest/committer-candidate-checklist/
which I mainly adopted from

Tianqi

On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 8:14 AM, Madan Jampani <madan.jampani@gmail.com>
wrote:

> There is a middle ground here. Instead of saying someone either has full
> committer privileges or zero, an alternative is to have scope of ownership
> start small and localized to modules or source folders where their primary
> contributions currently lie. For example, there are folks who contributed
> full languages bindings, or very good examples/tutorials.
>
> Over time, depending on the scope and complexity of their contributions
> they can be nominated to have their commit privileges broadened or even
> become core committers. Core committers have full commit privileges.
>
> Irrespective of whether some one is committer or not, we should all be
> using the PR process and opening up contributions for review/feedback.
>
> Madan
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 5:04 AM, Isabel Drost-Fromm <isabel@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 12:27:16PM +0100, Chiyuan Zhang wrote:
> > > Suppose we lower the standard or completely remove the formal standard
> > for
> > > committers, then we could probably be able to get more committers from
> > the
> > > first type. But that might not necessarily be good to us
> >
> > Can you elaborate your reasoning here? (I'm not implying that I agree or
> > disagree with you, I just want to understand where this fear is coming
> > from.)
> >
> >
> > > having people that could either contribute relatively important
> > components
> > > or provide longer term commitment to the project. But on the other
> hand,
> > > having a standard for committers do not (I hope) discourage the first
> > type
> > > of contributors to contribute PRs.
> >
> > Let me tell you a little campfire story: Back in the old days of Mahout
> we
> > implicitly had a relatively high bar for becoming a committer. People
> > thought
> > that in order to become committer they would have to contribute
> substantial
> > patches, often full new algorithm implementations.
> >
> > What the project really needed were a lot of work polishing, optimising,
> > cleaning, making easier to use, documenting etc.
> >
> > Due to the perception of requiring substantial contributions to get the
> > reward of becoming committer however we never received much of the
> latter.
> >
> >
> > Lesson learnt for me: The way you setup your reward systems greatly
> > influences which kind of help your project will receive.
> >
> >
> > Isabel
> >
> > --
> > Sorry for any typos: Mail was typed in vim, written in mutt, via ssh
> (most
> > likely involving some kind of mobile connection only.)
> >
>

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