On 17 July 2011 20:26, Kay Schenk <kay.sch...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 07/13/2011 06:37 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
... >> Contributions elsewhere do not count. It is contributions here that >> matter. There was plenty of time during proposal time for past >> contributors to step up. They did not. Now this is an ASF project >> everyone needs to earn merit in the ASF project not in what went >> before. > > One comment on this. I believe MANY past OpenOffice.org > contributors/committers were not even aware of the "proposal time". So, this > remark is a bit troubling to me. Really, it is only since well about June > 20th that more details of the move to Apache had emerged. It's reasonable to assume that anyone active in the OOo project should have been monitoring OOo lists and discussions. It's not like there wasn't a whole media storm about the proposal. If someone did not turn up during the proposal phase, read the proposal and see the invite to add themselves then it is reasonable to assume that they may no longer be significantly active. The process took weeks. There needs to be a cut-off period and that period is when the project became an Apache incubator project. Once OOo became and incubator project it started to operate like an Apache project. Those projects give committership to people who have earned merit, not to people who ask for it. It's not hard to earn merit in an Apache project, just do some stuff for the *Apache* project. This might seem unreasonable when some of the people being discussed here have been around for a very long time and done some fantastic work to get to this point, but there needs to be a point at which the project adopts the Apache Way. That time was when it entered the incubator. Ross > > I don't know how this information was supposedly made known, but, well...a > LOT of folks were NOT informed. > >> >>> �3. What do you expect to see as demonstration that the PPMC is being >>> even-handed in the invitation of new committers? >> >> Consistency in the application of committer selection guidelines. >> That, of course, begs the question "what are our selection >> guidelines". Personally I don't see any need to define these in >> advance. >> >> Anyone on the PPMC can propose anyone for committership. A discussion >> will take place and, in most cases a vote will be called. If I, as a >> mentor, see someone being inconsistent in their support or obstruction >> of any individual I will ask them to justify their position. If their >> position is consistent across each case then their opinion is entirely >> valid. >> >> Trying to define "rules" for these things does not make any sense, the >> types of contribution are just too variable. It is best to just let >> these things evolve and deal with them on a case by case basis, openly >> and transparently. >> >>> �4. Is it understood why the ooo-secur...@incubator.apache.org list is >>> being created and the safeguards that are intended with regard to the >>> security under which matters of security are raised? >> >> As a mentor I have some concerns about this. The private@ list is for >> private project communications. We've already seen far too much >> happening on the private@ list (although I am pleased to report to the >> ooo-dev list that this practice seems to have stopped now - well done >> PPMC members). >> >> That being said, I can see the logic in the argument. as long as this >> list is used *only* for security issues it should be fine. >> >>> �5. Most important: This is a learning experience for all of us. �What do >>> you want cleared up around these growing-pain considerations? >> >> I'll echo Shane's comments here. There is no need to rush things. Let >> them evolve naturally. Trying to anticipate issues before they arrive >> is likely to result in too much "red tape" around the project. >> >> That being said, again echoing Shane, I think mails like this that are >> purposefully designed to increase engagement and transparency will >> ensure that most issues are addressed in an appropriate and timely >> fashion. Keep up the great work. >> >> Ross >> >> >>> >>> �- Dennis >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Rob Weir [mailto:rabas...@gmail.com] >>> Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 14:34 >>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org >>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Project + PPMC Growing Pains >>> >>> Is this intended as a blog post? �It reads like one. In particular I >>> don't see any proposals to discuss. >>> >>> -Rob >>> >>> On Jul 12, 2011, at 4:30 PM, "Dennis E. Hamilton"<orc...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> We are just one month into being the Apache OpenOffice.org Podling. �It >>>> is useful to interesting to take stock of all that is happening and where >>>> we >>>> are. >>>> >>>> The main activity that we are all holding our breath over is the >>>> reconstitution of the code base under Apache. �There is also concern for >>>> the >>>> documentation and web sites and how they fit under an Apache umbrella. >>>> >>>> Depending on their interests and specialties, not everyone here is >>>> immediately able to contribute much. �We are in the process of organizing >>>> and bringing over and IP-scrubbing the initial artifacts for the project >>>> that will be the foundation for further work. �There is not much to get our >>>> teeth into in terms of actual development until that is sorted out. �(E.g., >>>> we don't have a bug tracker yet and the documentation, localization, and >>>> user-facing folk, including marketing, are still wondering how our project >>>> will accommodate them.) >>>> >>>> Meanwhile, there is also how we organize ourselves to operate as an >>>> Apache project. >>>> >>>> - Dennis >>>> >>>> � �1. BOOTSTRAPPING COMMITTERS AND THE PPMC >>>> � �2. HOW LONG IS THE OPEN DOOR OPEN? >>>> � �3. WHAT WILL IT TAKE TO BE A COMMITTER AS TIME GOES ON? >>>> � �4. WHEN BEING MORE PRIVATE THAN PRIVATE IS IMPORTANT >>>> >>>> >>>> 1. BOOTSTRAPPING COMMITTERS AND THE PPMC >>>> >>>> The set of Initial Committers is a self-selected group who added their >>>> names to the Initial Committers list on the original incubator proposal. >>>> �That's how the podling is bootstrapped. �Likewise, ooo-dev participation >>>> is >>>> fully self-selected, and it will stay that way. >>>> >>>> This means that we are a group of people who have not worked together as >>>> a single Apache project community before, even though there are a variety >>>> of >>>> mutual acquaintances and associations in the mix. >>>> >>>> Of the Initial Committers, a subset were eager to be on the project and >>>> have arrived. That is the overwhelming source of the current 54 committers, >>>> 41 also being on the PPMC. >>>> >>>> 2. HOW LONG IS THE OPEN DOOR OPEN? >>>> >>>> There are still about two-dozen Initial Committers who have not yet >>>> registered an iCLA. We don't know if they are arriving or not. �One issue >>>> is >>>> when to close the door on initial committers who have taken no initiative >>>> to >>>> be here, although reminders have been sent out. >>>> >>>> It is also the case that all initial committers are welcome to >>>> participate in the PPMC but not all have taken action to do so. �At some >>>> point, the PPMC will not grow automatically and that also needs to be >>>> resolved. >>>> >>>> 3. WHAT WILL IT TAKE TO BE A COMMITTER AS TIME GOES ON? >>>> >>>> We vote on other committers the same as any [P]PMC. �The addition of two >>>> invited committers has already been reported. >>>> >>>> One thing that concerns the PPMC (who, for all but two members, walked >>>> through an open door) is how and when do we move from consideration of >>>> previous reputation and being known to some of us to a situation where >>>> contribution on the podling is the determining factor. �We're working our >>>> way through that. �The PPMC is also concerned that, although the addition >>>> of >>>> new committers and new PPMC members is carried out in private, we be >>>> transparent about how we are conducting ourselves and that we demonstrate >>>> that we are even-handed about it. >>>> >>>> It is not clear what the ooo-dev community wants to see and what the >>>> understood progression to the normal rules for invitation of committers >>>> should be. >>>> >>>> >>>> 4. WHEN BEING MORE PRIVATE THAN PRIVATE IS IMPORTANT >>>> >>>> The PPMC is responsible for dealing, quietly and privately, with >>>> security matters and their resolution. �The security@ team informs us that >>>> because we have so many members who are unknown here and also to each other >>>> at this point, a limited ooo-secur...@incubator.apache.org list is >>>> essential. �We need to identify those few among us who have appropriate >>>> skills and sensibilities around security matters and who can keep their >>>> work >>>> secret when that is appropriate. >>>> >>>> For this, we want to know who has been on the security teams of >>>> OpenOffice.org and who happen to be here also. �There will also be >>>> cross-communication with other security teams that operate on the same code >>>> base, or in some cases, that operate on the same document formats. >>>> >>>> We will be going ahead with the creation of the private ooo-security >>>> list for that purpose. �What we are waiting for is identification of three >>>> moderators who are distributed around the earth's time zones well enough to >>>> provide moderation of incoming reports in something approximating 24/7 >>>> coverage. >>>> >>>> [end] >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > MzK > > "An old horse for a long hard road, a young pony for a quick ride". > -- Unknown > -- Ross Gardler (@rgardler) Programme Leader (Open Development) OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
