Just to contrast this with the IPMC itself, we discuss everything here, including past decisions. Almost everything that happens here is a community decision, and we try to move with near unanimous consent. It is generally hard to figure out what roles people have without some formal VOTE where people indicate a binding status on it.
That is what you should aspire to on your dev list- it really shouldn't matter what roles people have unless we need to be looking at a release. On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 11:37 PM, Joe Schaefer <joes...@gmail.com> wrote: > This may sound a bit pedantic, but the "Sentry project" isn't capable of > considering anything. > Either you are referring to a decision of the committers or the PPMC or > the community, all > of which requires some discussion over time about any position being > taken. I would consider > it unusual for the project participants to be unanimous on a situation > like this or other related > matters, and certainly opinions evolve over time. > > Nobody should put themselves in a position of speaking on behalf of the > project. That is why > we have communication channels in the first place and generally refer to > on list decisions. > The individual positions of the participants should be reflected in any > consensus-based decision > making. Not to say everything must be voted on, but collective decision > making requires > open communication, preferably on public channels. > > > > On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 8:26 PM, Lenni Kuff <lsk...@cloudera.com> wrote: > >> I think there is some confusion here. The Sentry project has never >> considered Committer == PMC. The recent website change was only to help >> clarify the roles of each of the members of the project, it was not the >> result of any decision being made. >> >> Thanks, >> Lenni >> >> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 3:03 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > >> > >> > On Nov 4, 2015, at 2:05 PM, Lenni Kuff <lsk...@cloudera.com> wrote: >> > >> > >> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 10:05 AM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> >> > >> wrote: >> > >> >> > >>> >> > >>> On Nov 4, 2015, at 11:32 AM, Joe Brockmeier <j...@zonker.net> wrote: >> > >>> >> > >>> * I would invite folks with access to go to Sentry's private list >> and >> > >>> look over discussions about adding new contributors, and discussions >> > >>> about the project in general. >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> I took a look. >> > >>> >> > >>> From a community growth perspective, I see them adding new >> committers, >> > >>> which is a good thing. What I don’t see is any discussion at all >> about >> > >>> adding PPMC members, nor any discussion about why they chose to go >> the >> > >>> Committer != PPMC route. >> > >>> >> > >>> In a thread related to the first new committer being added [1], it >> is >> > >>> pointed out that the podling website stated that Sentry was >> Committer >> > == >> > >>> PMC, but that the new member vote was only for Committer. At that >> point >> > >> it >> > >>> looks like the website was updated to reflect Committer != PMC. From >> > that >> > >>> point on, all new member votes were for Committer only, and there >> were >> > no >> > >>> discussions regarding adding new PMC members or promoting >> committers to >> > >> the >> > >>> PMC role. >> > >>> >> > >>> What I find slightly disconcerting is that there doesn’t seem to be >> any >> > >>> consideration or discussion around growing the PPMC and why that’s >> > >>> important. Sure they have 20-odd PPMC members from the initial >> > committers >> > >>> list, so it would take a pretty large exodus to render the project >> > unable >> > >>> to function, but I don’t see anything to indicate that they >> understand >> > >> the >> > >>> function and importance of growing the PPMC. >> > > >> > > Background: I am a Sentry community member. >> > > >> > > I would have to disagree with this. We have identified lack of new >> PPMC >> > > members as an issue and called out in our board reports. We are also >> > > encouraging non-PPMC members to get involved in ways they can become >> PPMC >> > > members - for example, we have had non-PPMC members run two of the >> last >> > > Sentry releases. As mentioned earlier, it's not like there is no >> progress >> > > here, we have people who are very close (and I agree that we can do a >> > > better job discussing this on or private@ list). We are also >> > encouraging >> > > others in the community to step up, giving them opportunities, and >> really >> > > striving to build a community around the project. >> > >> > Fair enough. >> > >> > Can you point me to the discussion where the project decided to go with >> > Committer != PMC over Committer == PMC? >> > >> > From an outsider's perspective, that decision just looks like a single >> > commit, without any public discussion, which speaks to the concerns >> others >> > have raised about decisions being made in private. >> > >> > -Taylor >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> > >> > >> > >
