One feedback on http://apex.incubator.apache.org/contributing.html It mentions about devel-3 for contributions.
I guess devel-3 is tightly coupled with 3.x releases. We need to decouple this OR make it as a part of the release process to update this page in case of major version bump up. ~ Yogi On 1 December 2015 at 12:28, Thomas Weise <[email protected]> wrote: > Guidelines have been added here: > > http://apex.incubator.apache.org/contributing.html > > Would the status page be the right place to document the PPMC member list? > > http://incubator.apache.org/projects/apex.html > > > > > On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Amol Kekre <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Taylor, > > The intention is to list guidelines to be a committer and (P)PMC member. > We > > do expect to grow both the committer list and the (P)PMC list drastically > > in near future. > > > > Thks, > > Amol > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 8:07 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Another option worth considering is Committer == (P)PMC. In other > words, > > > you don't make much of a distinction. You vote on and invite new > members > > to > > > become both. > > > > > > A number of projects have gone this route, as it can make things easier > > > when adding new members and reduce the number of votes/discussions that > > > need to take place. > > > > > > If Apex goes the Committer != (P)PMC route, I would suggest > establishing > > > guidelines for advancing from Committer to PMC. What you don't want is > a > > > perceived hierarchy or us/them situation, with no clear path for > > > advancement. > > > > > > -Taylor > > > > > > > On Nov 20, 2015, at 4:10 PM, York, Brennon < > > [email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > All, I’ve done quite a bit of reading on this topic and, now that I > > feel > > > I’m informed on how things should work given the documentation on the > > > Apache site [1][2][3][4][5], here’s my 2c on the whole discussion. > > > > > > > > First I want to clarify the roles and responsibilities of a Committer > > > and a PMC Member according to Apache. > > > > > > > > Committer[6] > > > > A committer is a developer that was given write access to the code > > > repository and has a signed Contributor License Agreement (CLA) on > file. > > > They have an apache.org mail address. Not needing to depend on other > > > people for the patches, they are actually making short-term decisions > for > > > the project. The PMC can (even tacitly) agree and approve it into > > > permanency, or they can reject it. Remember that the PMC makes the > > > decisions, not the individual committers. > > > > > > > > PMC Member[7] > > > > A PMC member is a developer or a committer that was elected due to > > merit > > > for the evolution of the project and demonstration of commitment. They > > have > > > write access to the code repository, an apache.org mail address, the > > > right to vote for the community-related decisions and the right to > > propose > > > an active user for committership. The PMC as a whole is the entity that > > > controls the project, nobody else. In particular, the PMC must vote on > > any > > > formal release of their project's software products. > > > > > > > > The biggest difference I see is that a Committer does not have the > > power > > > to direct the *long term* roadmap for the project while a PMC Member > can, > > > esp. as they (PMC Members) can reject patches as they see necessary for > > the > > > longevity of the project (including patches from Committers). > > Additionally > > > I haven’t found any documentation that changes the above definitions in > > the > > > context for an incubating project. Correct me if I’m wrong here. > > > > > > > > Now, if we (as the Apex committers / PPMC members) decide that we > > should > > > remove a majority of us (myself included) then I, personally, am okay > > with > > > that, but the better question I see would be *why* would we do that? If > > the > > > idea is to “trim the tree” so to speak and only keep a smaller set of > > > members in power (i.e. as PPMC members) then it is implying that the > > > original set of committers (that were proposed) should not have been so > > as > > > they cannot effectively direct the project. That’s an issue with the > > > original proposal and, I feel, should be addressed up front if so. More > > > than that though I assume each member that is on the original proposal > is > > > actually completely and acutely able to aid in the direction of the > > project > > > and that is why they were chosen in the first place. > > > > > > > > If the goal is then to quickly “build back” a larger PPMC committee > > > based on current active contributions I feel that this is going against > > the > > > Apache Way (whether I like it or not)[8][9] and, esp. for the project, > I > > > feel hurts us when considering a genuine goal of moving to a TLP. We > > should > > > instead use this as an opportunity to further embed Apache Apex into > the > > > Apache Way and define what “inactivity” means for a (P)PMC Member and a > > > Committer. > > > > > > > > Another point I’ve heard is that we want Apex to be very open to new > > > Committers which is amazing, but I want to make a point here that I, > as a > > > current PPMC Member, wouldn’t want to be giving away Committership like > > > candy. I would much rather see the Apache Way and its concept of > > > Meritocracy[10] in action. Moreover we, as a community, still haven’t > > > defined (that I know of) a strong set of guidelines that any individual > > can > > > follow to earn said merit in the project and become a Committer. This > > > certainly shouldn't be construed as a bad thing since we are still a > > > relatively young project and need to work these things out (and I’m > sure > > we > > > will :) ). > > > > > > > > So, what are my recommendations? > > > > > > > > 1. Keep the current PPMC and Committer list as they are > > > > 2. Establish a set of guidelines on what it takes to be a Committer > > > > 3. Establish a set of roles and responsibilities for a Committer on > > > Apache Apex > > > > 4. Establish #2 and #3 for a (P)PMC Member as well > > > > 5. Most importantly, establish a set of guidelines on what > “inactivity” > > > means for (P)PMC Members and Committers > > > > > > > > Also, because I didn’t want to clog the actual vote thread, I’ve > > > restarted this thread. Forgive me if that upsets anyone. > > > > > > > > I want to end by saying that this is my first foray in the Apache > > > project lifecycle, the Apache Way, and the general way Apache governs a > > > project. That said I have no clue how other projects have succeeded or > > > failed in the past with these issues, but I can only assume that this > is > > > certainly not the first time something like this has happened for a > > project > > > (nor the last) and I, for one, am confident that no matter what the > > > decision is we, as a community, will continue to strive for what is > best > > > for Apache Apex to grow into a truly successful project. > > > > > > > > Phew, that was a bit long. Candid feedback welcome and appreciated. > > > > > > > > [1] > > > http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Roles_and_Responsibilities.html > > > > [2] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html > > > > [3] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/committer.html > > > > [4] > > > > > > http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Roles+in+the+Incubation+Process > > > > [5] http://apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html > > > > [6] http://apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#committers > > > > [7] http://apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#pmc-members > > > > [8] http://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html#pmc-removal > > > > [9] http://www.apache.org/dev/committers.html#committer-set-term > > > > [10] http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#meritocracy > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Nov 11, 2015, at 3:49 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> +1 > > > >> > > > >> I've seen references in email threads to the effect that there are 6 > > > people that are/were supposed to form the PPMC, but I've not seen a > list > > of > > > who those individuals are. Granted, I may have missed it and I haven't > > done > > > an exhaustive search of the mailing lists. > > > >> > > > >> As Justin mentioned, only PPMC member votes are binding for things > > like > > > a release, so we need to know this information. We may also have to > > revoke > > > karma, but I'd have to check on that. > > > >> > > > >> Again, my apologies if that list was discussed/documented and I > missed > > > it. > > > >> > > > >> -Taylor > > > >> > > > >>> On Nov 11, 2015, at 6:28 PM, Justin Mclean <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> Hi, > > > >>> > > > >>> Also remember that a main practice difference between committer and > > > PPMC is that only PPMC votes are binding on releases. Committer votes > are > > > not binding. I see a lot of votes on Malhar release that state they are > > > binding when perhaps they may not depending who exactly is in the PPMC. > > > Would be good to clear this confusion up. > > > >>> > > > >>> Thanks, > > > >>> Justin > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________ > > > > > > > > The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and/or > > > proprietary to Capital One and/or its affiliates and may only be used > > > solely in performance of work or services for Capital One. The > > information > > > transmitted herewith is intended only for use by the individual or > entity > > > to which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the > > intended > > > recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission, > > > dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of, or taking of any > > > action in reliance upon this information is strictly prohibited. If you > > > have received this communication in error, please contact the sender > and > > > delete the material from your computer. > > > > > >
