PMCs at Apache have a wide latitude in managing the meritocracy. The simplest answer is the high-trust answer: if you demonstrate that you are a responsible contributor, you get commit access, and the PMC trusts that you won't abuse it outside your competence. More complex answers involve granting commit karma to portions of the source instead of to the whole shebang.
The former can work even for a very large project if the PMC is big enough and energetic enough to provide enough supervision. Much can be learned by looking at the existing TLPs and their practices. The most important principle is that the core Foundation principles allow for any sort of merit to be rewarded with appropriate responsibility. Hypothetically, someone who worked like a daemon in PR and evangelism might end up on the PMC without ever committing a line of anything or ever needing commit access. Thought the PMC might grant it to them anyway as a badge of merit. On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin <robertburrelldon...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Ross Gardler <rgard...@apache.org> wrote: >> On 02/06/2011 14:43, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote: >>> >>> Simon Brouwer<simon.o...@xs4all.nl> wrote on 06/02/2011 09:21:53 AM: > > <snip> > >>> What isn't clear to me are things like the following: >>> >>> 1) A strong QA member, who does manual testing, enters defect reports, >>> does smoke tests, etc. How do they advance in the meritocracy? Is there >>> any opportunity for them to be recognized as a committer and eventually as >>> a PMC member? >> >> Exactly the same as any other committer. >> >> We see them doing work and nominate them for committership. See >> http://community.apache.org/newcommitter.html (specifically the section >> "Guidelines for assessing new candidates for committership") >> >> It's important to understand one of our key rules around here is "if it >> didn't happen on the list, it didn't happen". As well encouraging >> transparency this ensures that peoples hard work is visible and thus earns >> merit. > > +1 > > So think about how to make contributions outside code as open, > transparent and visible as possible... > >>> All of these roles (and others which I've surely missed) are critical to >>> the project's success. How does a project typically recognize the lead >>> contributors in these areas? Is it a case of "If it is not checked into >>> the repository, it doesn't count" ?? I hope note. >> >> OpenOffice.org is no different to any other project in these respects, it >> works for all our existing projects, I'm confident it will work for >> OpenOffice.org ;-) > > +1 > > At Apache, we push power downwards towards projects and outwards > towards the community. > > This means we don't have to pretend we have all the answers but our > confidence arises from our past success in helping communities build > themselves. Answers will come from within the community. We like to > share the ways we have found success in the past and to eliminate > known paths to failure. > > Community over code :-) > > Robert > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
