GJ, regarding this, I request you ta add me to the initial committers. -- Herzliche Grüße, Best regards Michael Müller
Twitter: @muellermi Blog: blog.mueller-bruehl.de Web Development with Java and JSF: leanpub.com/jsf Java Lambdas and Parallel Streams: leanpub.com/lambdas Am 23. September 2016 07:50:53 MESZ, schrieb Geertjan Wielenga <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com>: >Hi all, > >Indeed, I now have greater clarity on the initial contributors list >thanks >to meeting John Ament this afternoon. > >The initial contributors list is somehow a magic list. Anyone on the >list >will, once the proposal has been voted on and accepted, automatically >be >contributors to the Apache NetBeans project. Anyone not on the list >will >need to be voted in by the initial contributors, which is a process >that >could be fast, but is still a process and can be avoided by inclusion >in >the initial contributors list. Everyone on the initial contributors >list is >automatically part of the PMC. Anyone added to the contributors list >after >the proposal has been accepted needs to be voted into the contributors >list >and can also be invited by the PMC members to join the PMC. At the end >of >the incubation period, the contributors list will be examined and those >who >haven't contributed can be approached to ask whether they'd rather not >be >removed from the list. Anyone on the list when the project leaves >incubation gets write access to the project for the rest of their life. > >I may have misinterpreted something, though I hope the above covers the >whole of it. I hope someone will clarify on the points I may have >misunderstood. > >If the above is accurate, we do need to work on the initial >contributors >list prior to voting on the proposal, quite aside from the infra >assessment. > >The following categories of people need to be approached to invite onto >the >initial contributors list: > >1. Everyone who has contributed to NetBeans over the past 6 months or >so >who are currently not one of the 26 Oracle employees currently on the >initial contributors list. These are all Oracle employees, as well as >at >least one other, who is already on the initial contributors list -- >Emmanuel Hugonnet from Red Hat who has contributed the WildFly plugin >to >the NetBeans repository and continues to develop it there. I am not >sure >how many additional initial contributors this will result in, I >estimate >potentially around 20. > >2. Everyone who has created or provided a NetBeans plugin over the past >6 >months or so. Not only will these people need to sign an individual >contributors agreement, but also a software grant agreement, to enable >their code to be contributed to Apache NetBeans. Not everyone who makes >functionality available will be relevant to contributing their code to >NetBeans, in some cases they may simply want to continue making plugins >available rather than direct source code contributions. Some of the >plugin >authors are from organizations, e.g., the TypeScript plugin is provided >by >developers at a company called Everlaw, who may or may not want to make >their code directly available to Apache NetBeans. Other plugins provide >useful bits of functionality, e.g., several of the plugins by Benno >Markiewicz fall into this category, which should simply be part of >Apache >NetBeans rather than being provided as plugins. Caoyuan Deng is another >example, working on the Scala plugin, as well as the developers who >have >worked on the Python plugin. I estimate that the number of initial >contributors from this category number at least about 20. > >3. Ex-employees from Sun and Oracle who have worked on NetBeans in the >past >and may want to get involved again. Here I'm thinking of people such as >Milos Kleint who worked on, for example, the Apache Maven integration, >as >well as several others, including Radim Kubacki (developer of >NBAndroid.org) and Jesse Glick, as well as Ralph Ruijs, plus several >more. >In this category, I estimate about 10 to 20 people might be applicable. > >4. Random other people, e.g., Wade Chandler, who has been participating >in >this thread, and has been working recently on Groovy enhancements for >NetBeans IDE. This is not a separate plugin and there are other cases >where >there are potential individual contributors who don't fall into the >above >categories. > >5. Anyone else who I may have skipped above, e.g., the person Roman was >referring to earlier, and anyone who volunteers after we send a few >e-mails >to the various NetBeans mailing lists. > >6. A final point about "intent" and "interest" in John Ament's mail >above. >There are two types of these -- those that are definitely going to be >contributing because their software depends on NetBeans, e.g., >Microchip's >MPLAB X is an IDE on top of NetBeans IDE, and the related developers >have a >very strong interest in committing themselves to Apache NetBeans. I >propose >we do keep this category of people in the initial contributors list, >which >is why I put them there initially -- they are different to someone who >may >have a vague idea about one day maybe contributing. This may seem a >strange >category and the argument could be made that they should only be added >once >they actually contribute during incubation. For this category, however, >since their interest is so strong and visceral because their business >literally depends on NetBeans, we keep them in the initial contributors >list and, in the unlikely event that they do not actually contribute >during >incubation, we remove them at the time incubation completes and TPL is >attained. > >Thanks and hope the above covers everything. At the end, we could have >about 100 additional people on the initial contributors list, though >that >is a very rough estimate. I do believe the above can be done quite >quickly >though and will be complete by the time the infra assessment is done. > >Looking forward to feedback! > >Geertjan > > > >On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 6:30 AM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> >wrote: > >> I spoke with Geertjan this afternoon. We both happened to be at the >same >> popular java conference in San Francisco. I did give him some advice >on >> the current initial contributors list. Basically two notes: >> >> - Add new members based on merit, not because prior to joining they >are >> interested. The way he explained it to me, many of the initial >committers >> are interested in giving back to Netbeans. They aren't able to due >to the >> licensing model from Oracle but are willing to under Apache. This >doesn't >> mean they will or will not contribute, but there is an intent. It >may be >> better to add them to the project as they begin contributing. >> >> - Ensure that everyone who has contributed to Netbeans in the past is >aware >> and eligible to be a contributor. There may be past employees who >want to >> still give back. Or even present employees who are now working on >other >> projects. They shouldn't necessarily be excluded from the list >because >> they don't currently work on Netbeans right now. >> >> I do see some issues for the project if they miss people from the >list. >> Voting in committers can be seen as a pain, especially if it is a >> potentially large list (I'm fairly certain that the initial >committers list >> here is the largest of any project so far at Apache). >> >> I also want to make sure that the infra assessment is done before >voting >> starts, just to make sure we're all in alignment on what is being >expected. >> >> John >> >> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 6:28 AM Stian Soiland-Reyes ><st...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> >> > I'm very convinced :-) I think the Netbeans proposal is ready for >a >> > [VOTE]! >> > >> > >> > >> > On 22 September 2016 at 13:57, Wade Chandler ><cons...@wadechandler.com> >> > wrote: >> > > >> > >> On Sep 22, 2016, at 08:27, Shane Curcuru <a...@shanecurcuru.org> >> wrote: >> > >> >> > >> Jochen Wiedmann wrote on 9/22/16 1:43 AM: >> > >>> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 7:18 AM, Roman Shaposhnik < >> > ro...@shaposhnik.org> wrote: >> > >>> >> > >>>> Still, the question remain -- for somebody like that, what >would be >> a >> > criteria >> > >>>> to be added as a committer after the project enters >incubation? >> > >>> >> > >>> Projects decision. >> > >> >> > >> Exactly so. This would be a podling just like every other >podling, >> and >> > >> the IPMC would expect the PPMC to start operating like an Apache >> > >> project. That is, when new people come to the podling and >contribute >> > >> work, and help the work of the podling, that after a time the >PPMC >> will >> > >> discuss them, then vote them in as new committers. >> > >> >> > >> Past merit (i.e. past contributions) is a great help to a new >> > >> contributor to a project, both because it's easier to get >started, and >> > >> because the community already has a feel for how they act and >can >> help. >> > >> But it in no way IMO directly leads to current merit. Old >> contributors >> > >> normally would be voted in as committers only once they actually >start >> > >> doing new work on the project. >> > > >> > > Perhaps we need to clarify what you mean by “old contributor” … >Do you >> > mean those currently contributing to the imported project, those >who have >> > contributed at some time in the past, but not in X days/months, or >anyone >> > not on the initial committer list? If the latter, then why would >this be >> > true for a current OSS project coming to ASF? If this is exactly >the >> case, >> > then more emphasis is put on the initial committer list IMO, and >that >> seems >> > an unnecessary distraction, and an artificial limit, but if it must >be >> that >> > way it must, and if not, then great, but please clarify. >> > > >> > > I ask this because I recently contributed some things for Groovy >> > support, and intend to work quite a bit on those features. I have >> > contributed quite a bit to the form (UI editor), J2EE, and Java SE >> modules >> > in the past. I don’t want to suddenly be hindered just because the >> project >> > moves to the ASF where I have to “start over”; I have invested >quite a >> > number of years into NetBeans and it’s community. >> > > >> > >> On Sep 22, 2016, at 07:00, Stian Soiland-Reyes ><st...@apache.org> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> > >> Agree - but the initial committer list is also an opportunity to >show >> > >> you really mean open development, and that it's not just >business as >> > >> usual with Friends & Family on the list. >> > >> >> > > >> > > Understood, but the impression still has to be on the community >all the >> > rules of merit apply regardless of perception. I have faith Gj and >many I >> > know on that initial list will make sure anyone who has made solid >code >> > contributions to NB, who also want to contribute in the ASF, will >be fast >> > tracked per prior NB community decisions. We are operating off this >> > assumption now; community and Oracle included per my understanding. >> > > >> > >> One of the freedoms a project gains from moving to ASF is >(somewhat) >> > >> relief from institutional political considerations. A new >intern at a >> > >> company would no longer just be given carte blance write access >> > >> without first engaging with the whole community and earning >merit >> > >> through contributions. Of course each community decides how high >or >> > >> low the bar should be to earn committership - but the bar should >be >> > >> the same for anyone. >> > >> >> > > I 100% agree with this. I think it is definitely that the rules >have to >> > apply to everyone equally including employees of a company >including the >> > donor. I don’t imagine someone who falls outside categories of >merit in >> the >> > current NB process now should suddenly be committers at ASF. >Committers >> > should be committers. Those who were well on their way to earn >committer >> > status should be considered, and it should be rare they are not >promoted. >> > Those not committing code or submitting patches now, should start >from >> the >> > premise they have to earn committer rights, and the project should >> enforce >> > that as a minimum; merit isn’t about free trophies or we’d all have >> > doctorates or be in the NFL or NBA :-D >> > > >> > >> >> > >> I found for several podlings that people (myself included) who >were >> > >> perhaps dormant "contributors" before the Incubator 'woke up' >after >> > >> being added as an equal peer on the initial list. The beginning >of a >> > >> podling; while sometimes struggling a bit with bootstrapping, is >also >> > >> a chance for a project to review many of its practices and to >build >> > >> common ownership - reduce the "us and them" feeling. >> > >> >> > > >> > > Sure; IMHO a sane committer of old should be a sane committer of >new; >> if >> > they want to be involved. My understanding in the current NB >processes >> that >> > is true now. Certainly in an OSS world people come and work as they >can, >> > and sometimes they can do more than other times. Sometimes they >> necessarily >> > have to become dormant; children, jobs, friends, life… In the NB >> community >> > we understand this and respect it; a work life balance. >> > > >> > >> I think Netbeans has the balance somewhat right - but I would >hope >> > >> there would be more engagement on their existing lists to more >openly >> > >> invite anyone who wants to join; or at least make it clear that >the >> > >> whole of the community (read: mailing list) gets to influence >project >> > >> decisions. >> > >> >> > > >> > > Yes, everyone on the lists “influences” the project now, but not >> > everyone on the mailing list gets “committer” rights or the same >> influence; >> > even in Apache projects that I have seen. We have a merit based >process >> for >> > that now. In the ASF us non-Oracle employee committers should then >gain a >> > higher level of influence as it becomes community driven versus >single >> > entity driven; we certainly have to step up though! … like >Spiderman’s >> > Uncle Ben said … great power; great responsibility. >> > > >> > > My assumption or expectation perhaps is roughly (and I imagine it >will >> > be close) 1) if you were a committer to NB, per its already >existing >> rules, >> > then you are in 2) if you were already submitting patches to “show >you >> know >> > what you are doing” per the current rules, then you are in 3) if >you were >> > not an active contributor, then you have to step up and show merit. >This >> > essentially models the current NB process, and per my involvement >with >> > different Apache projects over the years, is roughly like a lot of >them. >> > > >> > > Thanks, >> > > >> > > Wade >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > =================== >> > > >> > > Wade Chandler >> > > e: cons...@wadechandler.com >> > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: >general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Stian Soiland-Reyes >> > http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718 >> > >> > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> > >> > >>
