[Note post TSC call: this is the email I had written and found in my Drafts folder after the TSC call - so I had not sent it - DN]
Thank you for putting this together, Ray! A few comments: Your wiki stats look off - I would expect to see many more people in the list (of course the first thing I did out of vanity was look for myself, and I have definitely made a number of wiki edits and comments, but I am not in the list). We have so far discussed erring on the side of inclusion, so I am curious about your setting a bar at 50 or 100 contributions. It might make sense to have a minimum number for some of the lower impact activities like Gerrit reviews, but for others like patch submission, a lower bound of 1 might make more sense. For wiki edits 5 or 10 seems reasonable. If using a composite metric, I would lean towards a lower number (say, 20) rather than higher, to be more inclusive. Have you considered being active on the mailing list as a potential market of activity? Again the question of whether people who are active on the list, but inactive elsewhere, can be considered active contributors (I think they could) - there, perhaps 30 emails during the year is a good level. I would also be interested to hear if there are people who previously had a vote as committers, who would not have a vote under this scheme, or whether there is a big difference in the size of the community/electorate with your proposed levels. What do you think? Thanks, Dave. On 02/12/2018 01:12 AM, Raymond Paik wrote: > All, > > This is for the TSC composition discussion on Tuesday. > > As was discussed previously > <http://meetbot.opnfv.org/meetings/opnfv-meeting/2018/opnfv-meeting.2018-01-25-14.01.html>, > there was a consensus to look at a "union of contributions" across > various tools in OPNFV including Git, Gerrit, JIRA, and Confluence. For > example, we talked about people making a total of 50 or 100 > contributions across all tools over a 12 month period as the constituent > for the TSC election. > > In the attached, you'll see the data point across the 4 tools in 2017. > In the last tab, you'll also find a comparison of "top 50 contributors" > across the tools. Although there are some exceptions, you'll see that > active contributors are active across all 4 tools. One of the concerns > was that we want to be inclusive to recognize non-code contributions and > you'll see a high number of non-code contributors in both Gerrit and Jira. > > In terms of a threshold, 100 annual contributions seems like a good > starting point. As a point of reference, the following shows the number > of people that made 100 or more contributions in each tool. (Based on > this, we'll have a minimum of 112 people eligible for the TSC election > as we have 112 people that made 100 or more contributions to Gerrit alone) > > * Gerrit: 112 > * Git: 30 > * JIRA: 36 > * Wiki: 4 > > If we go to 50 annual contributions, I don't necessarily think there'll > be a significant increase in the pool and following is the breakdown. > > * Gerrit: 137 > * Git: 51 > * JIRA: 62 > * Wiki: 8 > > Please feel free to reply with any thoughts or feedback. This will be > discussed further during the TSC call. > > Thanks, > > Ray > > > _______________________________________________ > opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list > opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss > -- Dave Neary - NFV/SDN Community Strategy Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com Ph: +1-978-399-2182 / Cell: +1-978-799-3338 _______________________________________________ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
