On 18 October 2015 at 09:31, Hervé BOUTEMY <herve.bout...@free.fr> wrote: > from my understanding: > - PMC composition is available in 2 forms: committee-info.txt (= golden > source) and LDAP xxx-pmc group
The *only* record of current PMC membership is committee-info.txt. The LDAP committee group (modify_committee.pl) is only used for granting karma, e.g. to PMC-private SVN and dist/release. They should generally have the same members, since all (and perhaps only) PMC members should have the karma. However this is not always the case, and it's important not to confuse the two. > - committers list is available only in LDAP as xxx group The LDAP unix group (modify_unix_group.pl) generally grants karma to SVN. However not every PMC uses it - e.g. Commons and Subversion allow any ASF committer to commit. > > then instead of displaying: > * PMC from committee-info > * LDAP info: PMC + committers > > it would be easier to understand if the structure was more: > * PMC info from committee-info (and warning if LDAP PMC info is not > consistent) The consistency check is already done by Whimsy, but I suppose it could be repeated here. Or the Whimsy page could be linked if there was a discrepancy. > * committers info (no need to explain that it comes from LDAP) > > WDYT? That is basically what it did say before the recent change. Except that I do think it's necessary to explain that the committer (modify_unix_group.pl) info is just an LDAP group. There is no direct relationship with committers on a project in general. Commons and Subversion don't use the group for commit karma. Also it's relatively rare that people are dropped from the unix group, even if they have stopped contributing. So the group does not have any bearing on the current committer base. Additions to the unix group generally are associated with new committers, so that is probably worth reporting. > Hervé > > Le vendredi 16 octobre 2015 23:24:16 sebb a écrit : >> On 16 October 2015 at 21:08, Pierre Smits <pierre.sm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > I feel confident that anybody objects to ambiguous information, and that >> > no >> > one will object to improvement. >> >> I do object to conflating LDAP committee and PMC membership. >> The two are completely distinct (although related). >> >> This is why I changed the text to show LDAP committee rather than PMC >> a while back. >> At the time, the tool did not analyse the actual PMC membership, only LDAP. >> >> However it does now, so the output shows them as distinct items. >> >> The LDAP committee information is not really relevant to the board, so >> could now be dropped from the report skeleton. >> >> But I think it is completely wrong to imply that changes to the LDAP >> committee group have any bearing on PMC membership. >> >> > Best regards, >> > >> > Pierre Smits >> > >> > *OFBiz Extensions Marketplace* >> > http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ >> > >> > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 8:20 PM, Rich Bowen <rbo...@rcbowen.com> wrote: >> >> Although I acknowledge that the LDAP membership and the project >> >> membership >> >> might be different in certain weird edge cases, for the purpose of >> >> actually >> >> generating a board report, I find the current formatting confuses me >> >> Every >> >> Single Time. >> >> >> >> Viz: >> >> >> >> ## PMC changes: >> >> - Currently 10 PMC members. >> >> - No new PMC members added in the last 3 months >> >> - Last PMC addition was Jean-Fran=C3=A7ois Maury at Mon Apr 07 2014 >> >> >> >> ## LDAP changes: >> >> - Currently 26 committers and 10 committee group members. >> >> - No new committee group members added in the last 3 months >> >> - No new committers added in the last 3 months >> >> - Last committer addition was Lyor Goldstein at Thu Apr 30 2015 >> >> >> >> So, I can tease out of that there's 26 committers, and 10 PMC members, >> >> and >> >> the latest additions were Jean Francois on April 7, and Lyor on April 30. >> >> The rest of that phrasing is confusing to me. committee vs committer and >> >> LDAP vs ... whatever. Not sure. >> >> >> >> Does anybody object to me reformatting this a little, so that it won't >> >> confuse me next month? >> >> >> >> --Rich >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen >> >> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon >
