Hi Tony, I strongly support the proposal to mandate this. To be fair, I think TC should mandate this across all projects. In many complicated and technically hard commits, co-author does not make any less amount of technical contribution to the commit. If just the owner is counted, people will start to fight for the ownership of a commit which is not healthy for the open source community.
For my own case, it is well known that I am the initiator and project lead of this networking-sfc project and have contributed a lot to this project on the technical side and project management side. I have done many reviews and approvals in this cycle and co-authored quite some commits. It is a surprise to me that co-author is not counted as technical contributor in Neutron. Thanks, Cathy -----Original Message----- From: Tony Breeds [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 9:05 AM To: Tristan Cacqueray Cc: Cathy Zhang; Jeremy Stanley; Henry Fourie; [email protected]; Kendall Nelson Subject: Re: [OpenStack-Infra] Ballot for Openstack elections On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 12:44:43AM +0000, Tristan Cacqueray wrote: > Hi, > > The electorate roll generation tool[0] we used only collect owner of > gerrit merged review and Cathy actually wasn't part of the Neutron's > roll for Pike. It seems like the tool would need to also check for > Co-Author in commit message, but afaik it's not possible to assert > Foundation Member status solly based on mail address... > > Perhaps for such case, co-author could be added to the extra-atc list? Yup that's a per-project decision right now. I s'pose we could ask for a TC resolution to clarify / madate this if someone in the community felt strongly enough about this. Yours Tony. _______________________________________________ OpenStack-Infra mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra
