hg doesn't have the committer/author separation like GIT has, right? :( In the ASF it's good practice to give credits to the patch contributor in the commit, e.g.
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5bafa2ba5977ab88c8dfe376c9756825d948bce9afd3b69aa693ab96@%3Ccommits.openwebbeans.apache.org%3E But of course that makes doing the research much more complicated. Which brings us to another question: If the commits just referenced a bugzilla ticket, do we also like to migrate the bugzilla content over? Or at least keep it browsable somewhere? LieGrue, strub PS: I hope it was clear in my previous post that if some of the NetBeans contributors show up that I assume that they will get picked up via a VOTE pretty quickly. > On Saturday, 24 September 2016, 11:19, Emilian Bold <emilian.b...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > I assume there is a reason the list is called initial. It doesn't have to > be perfect. > > We should differentiate between a contributor and a committer. > > A lot more people contributed patches via bugzilla than actually committed > them in the Mercurial repository themselves. > > The reason being it was not a very common thing to get committer access. > > Furthermore, while I am a contributor and do have commit access and the > Oracle CLA on file most of my contributions don't show up under my name. > They show up under the name of the Sun / Oracle employee that got assigned > to the Bugzilla issue where I posted my patch. > > Considering how large NetBeans is I assume we will not have a short > incubation so there will be plenty of time to add committers. > > Pe sâmbătă, 24 septembrie 2016, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de.invalid> > a > scris: > >> >> >> Consider you did contribute 300 important patches to NetBeans over the >> years. Wouldn't it hurt your feelings that you are not enlisted on the >> initial committers list? >> >> >> But otoh the initial list of committers is not important for the ASF _if_ >> the PPMC makes a good job. >> Because if such a person comes knocking then some of the 'old' > NetBeans >> lords&ladies will hopefully recognise the person and any other PPMC > member >> will at least check the commit history for his/hers contributions. >> >> And if someone shows up who already contributed lots of good things in the >> past and would like to become active again, then it's just a matter of > 72h >> (VOTE time) to get him on board. >> >> BUT: we must clearly communicate that we start with a limited committer >> list simply because WE fail to compose a correct one from the very start. >> But people should know that we will fix this list over time. >> >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >> >> >> >> > On Saturday, 24 September 2016, 7:46, Emilian Bold < >> emilian.b...@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote: >> > > So on one hand the initial commiters list is not something so >> important and >> > we should realy just be careful about the PPMC then vote more > commiters >> > during incubation. >> > >> > On the other hand the initial commiters list is super important. >> > >> > Is there some actual incubation documentation clearing this up? >> > >> > I think it's a big administrative task to compile a perfect list. > It's >> > not >> > only about who has commit rights on the current repository, there are >> also >> > many that contribute good patches via Bugzilla, etc. >> > >> > Also, each individual would have to be contacted and agree to be on > the >> > list which also implicitly means they will sign the Apache CLA. >> > >> > I do not believe the initial commiters list could fracture the > community >> as >> > long as we provide a clear path to become a commiter. >> > >> > I maintained a NetBeans fork for a customer but it was a lot of work > to >> > backport fixes, etc. Nobody is going to go through all that trouble > just >> > out of spite because they were not on the initial commiter's list. >> > >> > >> > >> > --emi >> > >> > >> > On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 2:25 AM, Roman Shaposhnik > <ro...@shaposhnik.org >> <javascript:;>> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz >> >> <bdelacre...@apache.org <javascript:;>> wrote: >> >> > Hi Wade, >> >> > >> >> > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:38 PM, Wade Chandler >> >> > <cons...@wadechandler.com <javascript:;>> wrote: >> >> >> ..I can say as a long time contributor who is not on the > initial >> > list, I >> >> >> understand, think it is fine, and agree that being added > once we >> > get >> >> into >> >> >> the actual incubation phase makes sense... >> >> > >> >> > Thanks! >> >> > >> >> > As someone who has mentored several projects here in the > last ten >> >> > years or so I think although people sometimes see a lot of > value in >> >> > being on the initial committers list they should not, IMO. >> >> > >> >> > What very often happens during incubation is some people who > were on >> >> > this list almost never contribute to the project, and other > expected >> >> > or unexpected people show up, do great things and get > elected as a >> >> > result. >> >> > >> >> > Also, as mentor I will recommend reviewing the list of > committers and >> >> > PMC members shortly before graduation, to give the > opportunity to >> >> > people who didn't actually become active to gracefully > retire - if >> > the >> >> > project governance works it's easy to come back later by > becoming >> >> > active, and the project benefits from having a roster that > reflects >> >> > the reality of active contributors. >> >> > >> >> > So in summary people shouldn't put too much value on the > initial >> > list >> >> > of committers, it's just that - an initial list, a kind > of draft >> > that >> >> > will evolve during incubation, and probably evolve a lot for > a large >> >> > project such as NetBeans. >> >> >> >> Well, but they do. In fact, when I was a VP of Incubator a few > years >> >> ago I had to deal with a formal escalation brought to the ASF > level >> >> by somebody who felt unduly left out of that initial list of >> committers. >> >> If the code one wrote is going into ASF -- and especially if it > is a >> >> non-trivial amount of code, one can certainly expect some >> considerations. >> >> >> >> This is the same principle as ASF postulates when we say that we >> >> don't fork the communities. We truly don't. That's > why for a >> > project >> >> as large as NetBeans I think it is important for us to inquire > what >> >> kind of due diligence was done to get the list of initial > committers >> >> just right. Otherwise it is going to be OpenOffice vs. > LibreOffice >> >> type of situation all over again (not that commiters was the key >> >> issue there -- but you catch my drift). >> >> >> >> >> ...I am able to contribute as much as I can at this > stage >> > anyways... >> >> > >> >> > Indeed, and that stays true once incubation starts. Even > though an >> >> > Apache PMC ultimately makes all the project decisions, they > are >> >> > expected to listen to their community. The > "community" >> > section at >> >> > https://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project- >> >> maturity-model.html >> >> > expresses that. >> >> >> >> Right. And all I want to get out folks on this thread at this > point is >> two >> >> things: >> >> #1 admission that past contributions will be valued a LOT when > it >> >> comes to somebody requesting to be added as a committer to > the >> >> project during incubation >> >> >> >> #2 a bit of explanation of what was the process to arrive at > initial >> list >> >> of >> >> committers >> >> >> >> >> ...getting into building a thorough list before hand > will >> >> >> certainly take time away from higher priority items at > this >> > stage... >> >> > >> >> > Yes, that's why the NetBeans mentors pushed to avoid > adding people >> > to >> >> > the list of initial committers before the incubation vote > starts, as >> >> > for a popular project that's a lot of work with no real > value as >> >> > mentioned above. >> >> >> >> I disagree. Like I said -- being a VP of incubator having to deal > with >> >> that type of escalation was not a fun place to be in. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Roman. >> >> >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> <javascript:;> >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: > general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> <javascript:;> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> <javascript:;> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> <javascript:;> > >> >> > > -- > > --emi > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
