RE: [DISCUSS] Project + PPMC Growing Pains

2011-07-17 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton 
Yes, and we have a way to report and track bugs and other issues here [;<).

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: sa3r...@gmail.com [mailto:sa3r...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Sam Ruby
Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2011 14:58
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Project + PPMC Growing Pains

On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:
>
> Uh well...this was nice but I'm wondering why the same wasn't done on the
> openoffice lists, like maybe "announcements" ?

We are where we are.

Looking forward: Kay, who are you expecting to do this?  At this
point, this should be done by the members of the project.

Kay, if this is something that you feel needs to be done, simply do so
and keep this list informed of your progress.  As to what message
should be sent, I would encourage that message to be one that shows
people how to participate by sending in patches.  This may be easier
once there is actual code in the repository.

- Sam Ruby

Re: [DISCUSS] Project + PPMC Growing Pains

2011-07-17 Thread Kay Schenk 
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Sam Ruby  wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:
> >
> > Uh well...this was nice but I'm wondering why the same wasn't done on the
> > openoffice lists, like maybe "announcements" ?
>
> We are where we are.
>
> Looking forward: Kay, who are you expecting to do this?  At this
> point, this should be done by the members of the project.
>

OK, "announcement" postings are NOT public post, but it looks like Marcus
could do this. I'll contact him.


>
> Kay, if this is something that you feel needs to be done, simply do so
> and keep this list informed of your progress.  As to what message
> should be sent, I would encourage that message to be one that shows
> people how to participate by sending in patches.  This may be easier
> once there is actual code in the repository.
>

OK...


>
> - Sam Ruby
>



-- 
---
MzK

"An old horse for a long hard road,
 a young pony for a quick ride."
-- Unknown

Re: [DISCUSS] Project + PPMC Growing Pains

2011-07-17 Thread Sam Ruby 
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Kay Schenk  wrote:
>
> Uh well...this was nice but I'm wondering why the same wasn't done on the
> openoffice lists, like maybe "announcements" ?

We are where we are.

Looking forward: Kay, who are you expecting to do this?  At this
point, this should be done by the members of the project.

Kay, if this is something that you feel needs to be done, simply do so
and keep this list informed of your progress.  As to what message
should be sent, I would encourage that message to be one that shows
people how to participate by sending in patches.  This may be easier
once there is actual code in the repository.

- Sam Ruby

Re: [DISCUSS] Project + PPMC Growing Pains

2011-07-17 Thread Kay Schenk 

Dennis -- see below

On 07/17/2011 02:18 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

Hi Kay,

I think there is a conflict of expectations and it is something that
we need to address.

The PPMC is not only former/current OpenOffice.org contributors and
we don't all know each other.  And some of us are acquainted in
contexts that have nothing to do with OpenOffice.org.  (I'm at a
forgetful age, but I don't think you or I have had any direct
experience of each other's contributions outside of ooo-dev, for
example.)

In some sense, the most effective way to be seen and known at the
PPMC is to contribute in all of the (hopefully-increasing) ways there
are to contribute on ooo-dev.

Whether we should be fast-tracking notable contributors to
OpenOffice.org in some manner or whether we should have the Apache
meritocracy take over in a strict way is something that the PPMC has
to deal with.  You've hear one mentor assert the second case.


yes, I see this...



The composition of the PPMC is an accident of birth (and timing).
The presumption is that we will do the right thing in growing this
project into a thriving activity that merits advancement to an Apache
Top Level Project (TLP).  That is what the PPMC job is, no matter
what we might have individually expected on arrival.  Community
involvement is also a success factor.

How can we navigate the invitation of further committers in a
responsible way?


Well I DID in fact contact kenai -- though given the state of that 
project -- I don't know if I'll hear back. I asked them to send me a 
list of all members in projects long with their roles. I would think the 
new Apache venture should at least be interested in folks who are 
considered -- project admins on that side, and/or content/software 
developers. These are the people that would historically be considered 
"committers".  I would think that some effort should be made to contact 
these folks and ascertain future interest in participation and how.
Now there is info on the main OpenOffice.org site but there might also 
be lots of confusion.


Anyway, if I don't hear back from kenai soonish (and I will be out of 
touch mostly with family for about a week), I will try to pull this info 
myself. My fear at this point, as I've already expressed, is that a very 
large number of folks who were very actively involved becasue of the 
inherent set-up in the "old" way are likely feeling quite lost at this 
point. I don't mean to sound negative but, well, that's just what 
happens when thing underlying architecture and governance is SO changed.





What are your and other's further thoughts?

- Dennis

LOOKING BACK TO HOW WE GOT HERE

It is true that it is a short time from June 1 (announcement of the
incubator proposal and discussions on gene...@incubator.apache.com)
to June 10 (commencement of the ballot to accept the proposed
incubator project).

I'm not sure it was a short time for a typical incubator proposal.
The gating factors seem to be that (1) there was considered to be a
sufficient list of Initial Committers and mentors for starting a
podling of the size and ambitions anticipated for OpenOffice.org, (2)
the proposal had been refined enough, and (3) the discussion on
various issues raised by commenters had died down enough to consider
it being time to vote.  The Incubator PMC were the binding voters in
this case.

The idea of needing to make outreach to some broad community or
provide time to engage that community wasn't a prominent
consideration, as I recall.  Because of the OpenOffice.org -
LibreOffice schism, a number of experienced Apache folks went to TDF
lists to inform participants there and to discuss how Apache operates
and what can reasonably be expected.


Uh well...this was nice but I'm wondering why the same wasn't done on 
the openoffice lists, like maybe "announcements" ?




I have no knowledge of the communications that happened on lists and
forums frequented by OpenOffice.org contributors.  A substantial
proportion of OpenOffice.org participants appear to be among the
Initial Committers and there are more, such as yourself, who have
become active on ooo-dev since.


Right--I see that. From the participants, it seems many on the developer 
lists were contacted, and maybe some project heads, but




That's what happened that was visible to me.  (I saw the announcement
on June 1 and registered on the wiki and the incubator list the same
day.  My iCLA was sent in two days later and one week later I
received confirmation that it was registered.  It is clearly an
accident of timing that it came to my attention immediately.  That I
acted on it was my own sense and excitement over the opportunity.)


Well I saw this too but, kept waiting for something to come down in the 
"usual" way, vis a vis an announcement list, etc. Oh well...we each have 
our own ways of doing things I guess.






-Original Message- From: Kay Schenk
[mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com]

RE: [DISCUSS] Project + PPMC Growing Pains

2011-07-17 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton 
Hi Kay,

I think there is a conflict of expectations and it is something that we need to 
address.

The PPMC is not only former/current OpenOffice.org contributors and we don't 
all know each other.  And some of us are acquainted in contexts that have 
nothing to do with OpenOffice.org.  (I'm at a forgetful age, but I don't think 
you or I have had any direct experience of each other's contributions outside 
of ooo-dev, for example.)

In some sense, the most effective way to be seen and known at the PPMC is to 
contribute in all of the (hopefully-increasing) ways there are to contribute on 
ooo-dev.

Whether we should be fast-tracking notable contributors to OpenOffice.org in 
some manner or whether we should have the Apache meritocracy take over in a 
strict way is something that the PPMC has to deal with.  You've hear one mentor 
assert the second case.  

The composition of the PPMC is an accident of birth (and timing).  The 
presumption is that we will do the right thing in growing this project into a 
thriving activity that merits advancement to an Apache Top Level Project (TLP). 
 That is what the PPMC job is, no matter what we might have individually 
expected on arrival.  Community involvement is also a success factor.

How can we navigate the invitation of further committers in a responsible way?

What are your and other's further thoughts?

 - Dennis

LOOKING BACK TO HOW WE GOT HERE

It is true that it is a short time from June 1 (announcement of the incubator 
proposal and discussions on gene...@incubator.apache.com) to June 10 
(commencement of the ballot to accept the proposed incubator project).

I'm not sure it was a short time for a typical incubator proposal.  The gating 
factors seem to be that (1) there was considered to be a sufficient list of 
Initial Committers and mentors for starting a podling of the size and ambitions 
anticipated for OpenOffice.org, (2) the proposal had been refined enough, and 
(3) the discussion on various issues raised by commenters had died down enough 
to consider it being time to vote.  The Incubator PMC were the binding voters 
in this case.

The idea of needing to make outreach to some broad community or provide time to 
engage that community wasn't a prominent consideration, as I recall.  Because 
of the OpenOffice.org - LibreOffice schism, a number of experienced Apache 
folks went to TDF lists to inform participants there and to discuss how Apache 
operates and what can reasonably be expected.

I have no knowledge of the communications that happened on lists and forums 
frequented by OpenOffice.org contributors.  A substantial proportion of 
OpenOffice.org participants appear to be among the Initial Committers and there 
are more, such as yourself, who have become active on ooo-dev since.

That's what happened that was visible to me.  (I saw the announcement on June 1 
and registered on the wiki and the incubator list the same day.  My iCLA was 
sent in two days later and one week later I received confirmation that it was 
registered.  It is clearly an accident of timing that it came to my attention 
immediately.  That I acted on it was my own sense and excitement over the 
opportunity.)



-Original Message-
From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com] 

Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2011 12:27
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Project + PPMC Growing Pains



On 07/13/2011 06:37 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:

> Responding as a mentor - not as an OO.o committer...
[ ... ]
>> �2. A person is considered eligible to become a committer when there is an 
>> established pattern of contribution on the 
>> project:.
>>
>> �2.1 To what degree should contributions elsewhere -- a prior reputation -- 
>> be taken into consideration?
>> �2.2 For how long should we do this, if at all?
>
> 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.

I don't know how this information was supposedly made known, but, 
well...a LOT of folks were NOT informed.

[ ... ]

Re: [DISCUSS] Project + PPMC Growing Pains

2011-07-17 Thread Kay Schenk 



On 07/13/2011 06:37 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:

Responding as a mentor - not as an OO.o committer...

On 12 July 2011 23:39, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:

Good point, Rob. �I am not floating a proposal, more an opportunity for 
discussion. �Here are some questions:

�1. When should we conclude that the Initial Committers that have arrived are 
all that are coming and we should close the door, with all further committers 
being by invitation of the PPMC?


I'd suggest sending a notification to all who self-identified that
they have 10 days to either submit an ICLA or indicate that they are
taking advice before signing. The PPMC has been active in chasing
people. It's legitimate to close the door on those who do not respond
to such a request.

For those who are "taking advice" I would give an additional 30 days.


�2. A person is considered eligible to become a committer when there is an 
established pattern of contribution on the 
project:.

�2.1 To what degree should contributions elsewhere -- a prior reputation -- be 
taken into consideration?
�2.2 For how long should we do this, if at all?


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.


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"  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 act