mxnet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Hen <bay...@apache.org>
Subject Re: About Becoming a Committer
Date Fri, 15 Jun 2018 06:55:15 GMT
On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 10:54 PM, Pedro Larroy <pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com
> wrote:

> * I personally don't like the idea that comittership status is decided in a
> closed mail list. This is not the transparency level that I would expect in
> an open source project. I'm happy to receive feedback from others that
> might be opposed to my application for committer to know what things could
> be improved to get there. I have been doing a plethora of contributions to
> the project over a year including ARM support, Android and CI, obviously
> some of this work together with my team at Amazon (@lebeg,
> @KellenSunderland, @marcoabreu). I don't have visibility on how much longer
> one has to wait, or what needs to be improved to get there.
>

I agree in principle (which means I'm going to disagree, right? :) ).

Ideally discussion about extending community trust would be made in public,
however for many of us having that discussion in public is an uncomfortable
act. A private channel for feedback is not about hiding information from
the subject, but about creating a safe place in which someone can provide
that feedback.

I think you have a very valid and, slightly to the side, point of it not
being clear what steps are needed/remaining to become a committer; which is
affected by the podling pmc still seeking consensus on how they view it.


>
> * My team is on-call for CI / CD which is also sponsored by us. To fix
> problems promptly we would need write permissions to the repository. This
> would normal in any other project, be open source or corporate. I think
> it's not effective to be on-call when you can't submit critical fixes and
> wait days for a CR. Basically I think everyone responsible or involved in
> CI should have access rights. As you know, testing our project is a
> challenging task for reasons discussed before.
>

Personally I don't care. If the committers aren't handling the CI/CD then
it's not important to the project. It's EXCELLENT that you and your team
are contributing your time to run CI/CD for the project, but the notion
that an open source project requires an on-call CI/CD is, in my opinion,
the project having its priorities skewed. However, that said, I agree that
if the project is unable to survive without the CI/CD, then it sounds far
more important than whatever code is being committed and shows more
commitment to the project than the creator of a piece of code.

I'm pretty sure my opinion that the CI/CD is not crucial is heretical for
this community. I suspect that if I said we should turn it off for a week
there would be a wailing and gnashing of teeth from every corner of the
mailing list. Given that, I think you earn more 'become committer points'
by maintaining that CI/CD than someone does by coding.


> Please committers and mentors, provide a solution that allows us to work
> more effectively and move the project forward faster, as is vital to make
> it easier to contribute so we can attract more users.
>

+1. The podling pmc needs to find consensus on the become-committer stage.

Hen

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