On Sep 20, 2005, at 10:25 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Geir,
Am looking for specific timelines and specific things an indiviual can
do to make sure that they catch the eye of the PMC/PPMC for commit
status.
Offer a patch or contribution. That's pretty specific.
For a person looking from outside, there is no info on what
they should do (other than what they are doing right now) to become a
committer.
You are correct, and it's something I'm trying to resolve now.
+1 to make a policy doc in svn. But am really interested in getting
the ball rolling on voting specific people, get them commit access AND
more importantly getting out of their way and let them decide/work on
harmony's future.
Two things - this is not just a policy doc. it's how we will
behave. Second, it's not a "them", it's "us", at least for me :)
geir
thanks,
dims
On 9/20/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm going to shameless steal an idea from Andy Oliver. Amended with
#4 :
1) Anyone with a contribution that would belong in SVN can be
considered for commit status by the PMC (PPMC while in incubation).
This contribution can be anything - new code, a patch to existing
code, documentation, a change to the website, testing code or other
resources, etc. (Hopefully this gets people interested in harvesting
good docs from the WIKI, as that's worth commit status IMO)
2) If offered commit status by the PMC and accepted by the
individual, we will get an ACQ from the individual along with an ICLA
if not already on file with the ASF secretary. I'd ask that
individuals wait to do an ACQ until offered, as the ACQ will be
evolving over time as we learn, and I'd like to ask that a new
committer have the current version on file as of the date of them
being added as a commmitter.
3) The individual would be given free reign in the area to which they
contributed, and trusted to engage with the relevant part of the
community for other areas of our codebase/resourcebase.
4) A committer will lose commit status after 4 months of inactivity.
In order to regain commit status, that person must begin
participating by offering a patch, new code, etc :)
On Sep 20, 2005, at 10:07 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Adding committers to a project is a problem every project faces,
and there are quite a large number of ways to do it. I've been too
worried about legal issues (and they pop up often) lately, and this
is a good subject for us to resolve now.
We must
* have a visible process to ensure fairness
* a low barrier to entry to get people helping
* a rigid transparent process to ensure safety of the codebase in
terms of IP provenance
* a cultural standard through which people work on things that they
have demonstrated competence to the rest of the community.
For the last point, except for keeping people away from parts of
the subversion repository to which they have had prior exposure
they can't get resolved, we want to have one kind of committer.
However, it's clear that we all have different levels of talent in
different areas of technology. So a nice way to work - I think -
is that committers are added for work in a specific area on a trust
basis, and if they want to work in other areas, they engage with
others already working there and get informal approval to commit at
will. IOW, don't just go rummaging through code in which you have
no experience, but work with those that are. This is something
that I've heard work well in projects like Subversion, and we're
trying it in Geronimo to recognize that the barrier to entry varies
by person and technology they are interested in working on.
So I'd like to keep it really simple :
1) Anyone with a contribution that would belong in SVN can be
considered for commit status by the PMC (PPMC while in
incubation). This contribution can be anything - new code, a patch
to existing code, documentation, a change to the website, testing
code or other resources, etc. (Hopefully this gets people
interested in harvesting good docs from the WIKI, as that's worth
commit status IMO)
2) If offered commit status by the PMC and accepted by the
individual, we will get an ACQ from the individual along with an
ICLA if not already on file with the ASF secretary. I'd ask that
individuals wait to do an ACQ until offered, as the ACQ will be
evolving over time as we learn, and I'd like to ask that a new
committer have the current version on file as of the date of them
being added as a commmitter.
3) The individual would be given free reign in the area to which
they contributed, and trusted to engage with the relevant part of
the community for other areas of our codebase/resourcebase.
Comments? If people agree to this, I'd like to add this to our
website as part of the project policy.
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/ - Oxygenating The Web Service
Platform
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
