You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org> on 2007/04/04 05:10:03 UTC
Question about the PMC structure for graduating projects
OpenEJB is in the process of graduating from incubation. A question
has come up about the composition of the PMC for a resolution that is
brought the board as a request to be a TLP. Is it standard practice
to take the existing PPMC forward to the board or can the project, in
its discretion, suggest a PMC made up of a different group of
members? For instance, the initial PPMC was made up of mentors as
well as committers. However, the composition of the proposed PMC is
missing many of the committers that have been active and working on
the project for sometime. Is it appropriate to include those members
in the proposal or simply stay with the PPMC and build the new PMC
after graduation?
Thanks
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Question about the PMC structure for graduating projects
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Craig L Russell wrote:
>
> I'd suggest you have the discussion about the future composition of the
> PMC as a group, using the dev list as a vehicle. You might find out that
> there are committers who would like to take part in the PMC.
I strongly suggest that you include all committers who have demonstrated
sustained participation in the project in the PMC.
If they decline to participate, you can strike them from that list before
the resolution goes to the board. But a PMC is the 'owner' and trustee
of the code, and all sustained contributors should have a voice there.
Even at httpd, we have only a 3-6 mos sustained activity requirement to
obtain commit access, and an additional 6 mos sustained activity reqm't
to become a PMC member. In the past 7 or 8 years, only a tiny handful
of individuals declined to become a PMC member for very specific reasons.
And httpd is considered the extreme end of the spectrum, many incubator
podlings are adding folks to committer + PPMC from the moment they've
shown sustained activity.
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Question about the PMC structure for graduating projects
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
Hi Matt,
The last official act of the PPMC is to graduate the project from the
incubator. By that time, it should have learned how to govern itself.
While there is no policy, I believe that graduation is a good time to
take stock of the PPMC membership and committers and decide who will
be there after graduation.
I'd suggest you have the discussion about the future composition of
the PMC as a group, using the dev list as a vehicle. You might find
out that there are committers who would like to take part in the PMC.
more specific comments below...
On Apr 3, 2007, at 8:10 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> OpenEJB is in the process of graduating from incubation. A
> question has come up about the composition of the PMC for a
> resolution that is brought the board as a request to be a TLP. Is
> it standard practice to take the existing PPMC forward to the board
> or can the project, in its discretion, suggest a PMC made up of a
> different group of members? For instance, the initial PPMC was made
> up of mentors as well as committers.
The Incubator policy says that the mentors are representatives of the
sponsoring project, and if they want to fully participate in the
project they have to earn it just like anyone else.
> However, the composition of the proposed PMC is missing many of the
> committers that have been active and working on the project for
> sometime. Is it appropriate to include those members in the
> proposal or simply stay with the PPMC and build the new PMC after
> graduation?
It's up to the PPMC. Graduation is a good time to correct oversights
that benefit the project going forward.
Craig
>
> Thanks
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
Craig Russell
DB PMC, OpenJPA PPMC
clr@apache.org http://db.apache.org/jdo
Re: Question about the PMC structure for graduating projects
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@gmail.com>.
On 04/04/07, Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org> wrote:
> Is it appropriate to include those members
> in the proposal or simply stay with the PPMC and build the new PMC
> after graduation?
Its very easy to do either - the PPMC can vote to add those people to
the current PPMC before taking the vote to graduate any further. Or if
people are happy to do that afterwards, it can progress in the same
way.
There's no hard and fast rule here, and I think the important thing to
decide over at the openejb list is to get consensus on how to move
forward. I'll follow up there.
- Brett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Question about the PMC structure for graduating projects
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 4/4/07, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
> On Wednesday 04 April 2007 11:10, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> > Is it standard practice to take the existing PPMC forward to the
> > board or can the project, in its discretion, suggest a PMC made
> > up of a different group of members?
>
> The 'standard' practice is that the PPMC is moved forward to the new TLP
> project's PMC. It has also been 'standard' that the committers are kept
> as-is. However, some communities have arranged for 'clean up' operations
> prior to the graduation proposal in collaboration with the Incubator PMC.
> AFAIK, this is done in discussion with the people involved to limit any bad
> feelings. End of the day, the purpose has been to keep the 'active'
> community. But there are no policy in place (AFAIK).
> Discussions has occured whether 'previous to ASF active' people should be
> committers or not. I don't think there are any definite conclusion on that,
> and handled case by case.
+1
though not a requirement, if the lists don't tally questions may be
asked and explanations made which takes time. so, i recommend a quick
tidy up operation on the PPMC so that the final list is the same as
the proposal list.
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Question about the PMC structure for graduating projects
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 11:10, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> Is it standard practice to take the existing PPMC forward to the
> board or can the project, in its discretion, suggest a PMC made
> up of a different group of members?
The 'standard' practice is that the PPMC is moved forward to the new TLP
project's PMC. It has also been 'standard' that the committers are kept
as-is. However, some communities have arranged for 'clean up' operations
prior to the graduation proposal in collaboration with the Incubator PMC.
AFAIK, this is done in discussion with the people involved to limit any bad
feelings. End of the day, the purpose has been to keep the 'active'
community. But there are no policy in place (AFAIK).
Discussions has occured whether 'previous to ASF active' people should be
committers or not. I don't think there are any definite conclusion on that,
and handled case by case.
> For instance, the initial PPMC was made up of mentors as
> well as committers. However, the composition of the proposed PMC is
> missing many of the committers that have been active and working on
> the project for sometime. Is it appropriate to include those members
> in the proposal or simply stay with the PPMC and build the new PMC
> after graduation?
Personally, I am of the opinion that all committers should be PMC members, but
it is for each PMC to decide how they handle questions like these.
I hope that helps.
Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org