I've not seen any other project do that, but it would work. The PMC chair would need to craft the wording of the emails: starting a vote on the private list, announcing the result on the private list, notice to the board, and inviting the contributor. They could do this the first time that a vote occurs after graduation.
Would the individual have the right to ask for PMC membership at a later date, without a PMC vote? Per [1] the invitation is sent only after the board has been notified. So if they decline, all of the necessary steps to make them a PMC member will already have been done. Julian [1] https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html#newpmc On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 8:58 AM Frank Greguska <fg...@apache.org> wrote: > > +1 to Nga's suggestion of default single tier including PMC membership with > individual option to opt-out and receive committer-ship only. > > On Sun, Feb 25, 2024 at 4:18 PM Nga Chung <nch...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Thanks Riley, Julian. > > > > I wonder if it would make sense to go with the one tier, but > > optionally allow the invitee to opt out of PMC membership if they only > > want committership. This way we keep it simple, but also don't scare > > away potential contributors if PMC membership appears like more > > responsibility (even if it really isn't) than they are ready for. > > > > Best, > > Nga > > > > On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 3:43 PM Riley Kuttruff <r...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > I'm personally in favor of the two-tier solution as I think it would be > > more suitable for > > > growing our community. As Julian said it's a lower barrier to entry. > > > > > > On 2024/01/16 22:53:38 Julian Hyde wrote: > > > > In favor of one tier (everyone who is a committer is on the PMC): > > > > * People perceive that there are two tiers to the project (and assume > > that the PMC is doing something nefarious, when in fact it is usually, > > quite correctly, doing very little). > > > > * Simplicity. > > > > > > > > In favor of two tiers (some committers are not PMC members): > > > > * The bar to committership is lowered. PMC members will give someone > > the commit bit after just two or three code contributions, or some nice > > work answering questions or giving conference talks. > > > > > > > > Julian > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 16, 2024, at 2:47 PM, Nga Chung <nch...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I also like the DISCUSS thread example for talking about future > > > > > committers / PMC members. > > > > > > > > > > What is the pro / con of having committers who are not also a PMC > > member? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Nga > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 7:13 AM Riley Kuttruff <r...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> Hi Julian, > > > > >> > > > > >> That makes a lot of sense as a better alternative to the whole > > nomination > > > > >> process. > > > > >> > > > > >> On 2024/01/11 23:56:13 Julian Hyde wrote: > > > > >>> I don't think the process needs to be very formal (e.g. included in > > > > >>> the bylaws) or agreed before graduation. But it does need to be an > > > > >>> organizational habit. This discussion thread, if it reaches > > consensus, > > > > >>> could be all the process we need. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> KVRocks' template email starts 'I nominate...'. I think it's > > important > > > > >>> to lower the bar to discussing new committers and PMC members, so > > we > > > > >>> can talk about people who "might be ready". Because often they > > *are* > > > > >>> ready. It could be a simple email to private@: > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> [DISCUSS] Alex Doe for committer > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> I think Alex Doe has been doing some good work recently[1]. They > > have > > > > >>>> made a couple of good PRs, one of which has been merged, and have > > > > >>>> also been answering a lot of questions in the forums. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Do you think Alex has earned enough merit, or should we wait a > > couple of months? > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> [1] > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-sdap-nexus/commits?author=alexdoe > > > > >>> > > > > >>> In my experience, once there has been a good discussion, the voting > > > > >>> process is very straightforward. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> SDAP should also set a policy (if it doesn't have one) about > > whether > > > > >>> it is possible to be a committer without being a PMC member. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Julian > > > > >>> > > > > >>> On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 12:57 PM Riley Kuttruff <r...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Hi all, > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> While working through the maturity model, I noticed SDAP doesn't > > seem to have a documented, formal process for adding committers or PMC > > members (at least, none that I could find). I think we should make an > > effort to establish and ratify a process for this. I think the one outlined > > here [1] would be fine. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Let me know what you think or if you have any alternative > > processes in mind. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Thanks, > > > > >>>> Riley > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> [1] > > https://kvrocks.incubator.apache.org/community/vote-a-core-developer/ > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >
