Re: Discuss PPMC

[Thomas Weise <th...@datatorrent.com>]

Guidelines have been added here:

http://apex.incubator.apache.org/contributing.html

Would the status page be the right place to document the PPMC member list?

http://incubator.apache.org/projects/apex.html




On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Amol Kekre <am...@datatorrent.com> wrote:

> Taylor,
> The intention is to list guidelines to be a committer and (P)PMC member. We
> do expect to grow both the committer list and the (P)PMC list drastically
> in near future.
>
> Thks,
> Amol
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 8:07 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <pt...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Another option worth considering is Committer == (P)PMC. In other words,
> > you don't make much of a distinction. You vote on and invite new members
> to
> > become both.
> >
> > A number of projects have gone this route, as it can make things easier
> > when adding new members and reduce the number of votes/discussions that
> > need to take place.
> >
> > If Apex goes the Committer != (P)PMC route, I would suggest establishing
> > guidelines for advancing from Committer to PMC. What you don't want is a
> > perceived hierarchy or us/them situation, with no clear path for
> > advancement.
> >
> > -Taylor
> >
> > > On Nov 20, 2015, at 4:10 PM, York, Brennon <
> Brennon.York@capitalone.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > All, I’ve done quite a bit of reading on this topic and, now that I
> feel
> > I’m informed on how things should work given the documentation on the
> > Apache site [1][2][3][4][5], here’s my 2c on the whole discussion.
> > >
> > > First I want to clarify the roles and responsibilities of a Committer
> > and a PMC Member according to Apache.
> > >
> > > Committer[6]
> > > A committer is a developer that was given write access to the code
> > repository and has a signed Contributor License Agreement (CLA) on file.
> > They have an apache.org mail address. Not needing to depend on other
> > people for the patches, they are actually making short-term decisions for
> > the project. The PMC can (even tacitly) agree and approve it into
> > permanency, or they can reject it. Remember that the PMC makes the
> > decisions, not the individual committers.
> > >
> > > PMC Member[7]
> > > A PMC member is a developer or a committer that was elected due to
> merit
> > for the evolution of the project and demonstration of commitment. They
> have
> > write access to the code repository, an apache.org mail address, the
> > right to vote for the community-related decisions and the right to
> propose
> > an active user for committership. The PMC as a whole is the entity that
> > controls the project, nobody else. In particular, the PMC must vote on
> any
> > formal release of their project's software products.
> > >
> > > The biggest difference I see is that a Committer does not have the
> power
> > to direct the *long term* roadmap for the project while a PMC Member can,
> > esp. as they (PMC Members) can reject patches as they see necessary for
> the
> > longevity of the project (including patches from Committers).
> Additionally
> > I haven’t found any documentation that changes the above definitions in
> the
> > context for an incubating project. Correct me if I’m wrong here.
> > >
> > > Now, if we (as the Apex committers / PPMC members) decide that we
> should
> > remove a majority of us (myself included) then I, personally, am okay
> with
> > that, but the better question I see would be *why* would we do that? If
> the
> > idea is to “trim the tree” so to speak and only keep a smaller set of
> > members in power (i.e. as PPMC members) then it is implying that the
> > original set of committers (that were proposed) should not have been so
> as
> > they cannot effectively direct the project. That’s an issue with the
> > original proposal and, I feel, should be addressed up front if so. More
> > than that though I assume each member that is on the original proposal is
> > actually completely and acutely able to aid in the direction of the
> project
> > and that is why they were chosen in the first place.
> > >
> > > If the goal is then to quickly “build back” a larger PPMC committee
> > based on current active contributions I feel that this is going against
> the
> > Apache Way (whether I like it or not)[8][9] and, esp. for the project, I
> > feel hurts us when considering a genuine goal of moving to a TLP. We
> should
> > instead use this as an opportunity to further embed Apache Apex into the
> > Apache Way and define what “inactivity” means for a (P)PMC Member and a
> > Committer.
> > >
> > > Another point I’ve heard is that we want Apex to be very open to new
> > Committers which is amazing, but I want to make a point here that I, as a
> > current PPMC Member, wouldn’t want to be giving away Committership like
> > candy. I would much rather see the Apache Way and its concept of
> > Meritocracy[10] in action. Moreover we, as a community, still haven’t
> > defined (that I know of) a strong set of guidelines that any individual
> can
> > follow to earn said merit in the project and become a Committer. This
> > certainly shouldn't be construed as a bad thing since we are still a
> > relatively young project and need to work these things out (and I’m sure
> we
> > will :) ).
> > >
> > > So, what are my recommendations?
> > >
> > > 1. Keep the current PPMC and Committer list as they are
> > > 2. Establish a set of guidelines on what it takes to be a Committer
> > > 3. Establish a set of roles and responsibilities for a Committer on
> > Apache Apex
> > > 4. Establish #2 and #3 for a (P)PMC Member as well
> > > 5. Most importantly, establish a set of guidelines on what “inactivity”
> > means for (P)PMC Members and Committers
> > >
> > > Also, because I didn’t want to clog the actual vote thread, I’ve
> > restarted this thread. Forgive me if that upsets anyone.
> > >
> > > I want to end by saying that this is my first foray in the Apache
> > project lifecycle, the Apache Way, and the general way Apache governs a
> > project. That said I have no clue how other projects have succeeded or
> > failed in the past with these issues, but I can only assume that this is
> > certainly not the first time something like this has happened for a
> project
> > (nor the last) and I, for one, am confident that no matter what the
> > decision is we, as a community, will continue to strive for what is best
> > for Apache Apex to grow into a truly successful project.
> > >
> > > Phew, that was a bit long. Candid feedback welcome and appreciated.
> > >
> > > [1]
> > http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Roles_and_Responsibilities.html
> > > [2] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html
> > > [3] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/committer.html
> > > [4]
> >
> http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Roles+in+the+Incubation+Process
> > > [5] http://apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html
> > > [6] http://apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#committers
> > > [7] http://apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#pmc-members
> > > [8] http://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html#pmc-removal
> > > [9] http://www.apache.org/dev/committers.html#committer-set-term
> > > [10] http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#meritocracy
> > >
> > >
> > >> On Nov 11, 2015, at 3:49 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <pt...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> +1
> > >>
> > >> I've seen references in email threads to the effect that there are 6
> > people that are/were supposed to form the PPMC, but I've not seen a list
> of
> > who those individuals are. Granted, I may have missed it and I haven't
> done
> > an exhaustive search of the mailing lists.
> > >>
> > >> As Justin mentioned, only PPMC member votes are binding for things
> like
> > a release, so we need to know this information. We may also have to
> revoke
> > karma, but I'd have to check on that.
> > >>
> > >> Again, my apologies if that list was discussed/documented and I missed
> > it.
> > >>
> > >> -Taylor
> > >>
> > >>> On Nov 11, 2015, at 6:28 PM, Justin Mclean <ju...@me.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Hi,
> > >>>
> > >>> Also remember that a main practice difference between committer and
> > PPMC is that only PPMC votes are binding on releases. Committer votes are
> > not binding. I see a lot of votes on Malhar release that state they are
> > binding when perhaps they may not depending who exactly is in the PPMC.
> > Would be good to clear this confusion up.
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>> Justin
> > >
> > > ________________________________________________________
> > >
> > > The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and/or
> > proprietary to Capital One and/or its affiliates and may only be used
> > solely in performance of work or services for Capital One. The
> information
> > transmitted herewith is intended only for use by the individual or entity
> > to which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the
> intended
> > recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission,
> > dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of, or taking of any
> > action in reliance upon this information is strictly prohibited. If you
> > have received this communication in error, please contact the sender and
> > delete the material from your computer.
> >
>

Re: Discuss PPMC

[Yogi Devendra <yo...@apache.org>]

One feedback on http://apex.incubator.apache.org/contributing.html
It mentions about devel-3 for contributions.

I guess devel-3 is tightly coupled with 3.x releases. We need to decouple
this OR make it as a part of the release process to update this page in
case of major version bump up.


~ Yogi

On 1 December 2015 at 12:28, Thomas Weise <th...@datatorrent.com> wrote:

> Guidelines have been added here:
>
> http://apex.incubator.apache.org/contributing.html
>
> Would the status page be the right place to document the PPMC member list?
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/apex.html
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Amol Kekre <am...@datatorrent.com> wrote:
>
> > Taylor,
> > The intention is to list guidelines to be a committer and (P)PMC member.
> We
> > do expect to grow both the committer list and the (P)PMC list drastically
> > in near future.
> >
> > Thks,
> > Amol
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 8:07 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <pt...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Another option worth considering is Committer == (P)PMC. In other
> words,
> > > you don't make much of a distinction. You vote on and invite new
> members
> > to
> > > become both.
> > >
> > > A number of projects have gone this route, as it can make things easier
> > > when adding new members and reduce the number of votes/discussions that
> > > need to take place.
> > >
> > > If Apex goes the Committer != (P)PMC route, I would suggest
> establishing
> > > guidelines for advancing from Committer to PMC. What you don't want is
> a
> > > perceived hierarchy or us/them situation, with no clear path for
> > > advancement.
> > >
> > > -Taylor
> > >
> > > > On Nov 20, 2015, at 4:10 PM, York, Brennon <
> > Brennon.York@capitalone.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > All, I’ve done quite a bit of reading on this topic and, now that I
> > feel
> > > I’m informed on how things should work given the documentation on the
> > > Apache site [1][2][3][4][5], here’s my 2c on the whole discussion.
> > > >
> > > > First I want to clarify the roles and responsibilities of a Committer
> > > and a PMC Member according to Apache.
> > > >
> > > > Committer[6]
> > > > A committer is a developer that was given write access to the code
> > > repository and has a signed Contributor License Agreement (CLA) on
> file.
> > > They have an apache.org mail address. Not needing to depend on other
> > > people for the patches, they are actually making short-term decisions
> for
> > > the project. The PMC can (even tacitly) agree and approve it into
> > > permanency, or they can reject it. Remember that the PMC makes the
> > > decisions, not the individual committers.
> > > >
> > > > PMC Member[7]
> > > > A PMC member is a developer or a committer that was elected due to
> > merit
> > > for the evolution of the project and demonstration of commitment. They
> > have
> > > write access to the code repository, an apache.org mail address, the
> > > right to vote for the community-related decisions and the right to
> > propose
> > > an active user for committership. The PMC as a whole is the entity that
> > > controls the project, nobody else. In particular, the PMC must vote on
> > any
> > > formal release of their project's software products.
> > > >
> > > > The biggest difference I see is that a Committer does not have the
> > power
> > > to direct the *long term* roadmap for the project while a PMC Member
> can,
> > > esp. as they (PMC Members) can reject patches as they see necessary for
> > the
> > > longevity of the project (including patches from Committers).
> > Additionally
> > > I haven’t found any documentation that changes the above definitions in
> > the
> > > context for an incubating project. Correct me if I’m wrong here.
> > > >
> > > > Now, if we (as the Apex committers / PPMC members) decide that we
> > should
> > > remove a majority of us (myself included) then I, personally, am okay
> > with
> > > that, but the better question I see would be *why* would we do that? If
> > the
> > > idea is to “trim the tree” so to speak and only keep a smaller set of
> > > members in power (i.e. as PPMC members) then it is implying that the
> > > original set of committers (that were proposed) should not have been so
> > as
> > > they cannot effectively direct the project. That’s an issue with the
> > > original proposal and, I feel, should be addressed up front if so. More
> > > than that though I assume each member that is on the original proposal
> is
> > > actually completely and acutely able to aid in the direction of the
> > project
> > > and that is why they were chosen in the first place.
> > > >
> > > > If the goal is then to quickly “build back” a larger PPMC committee
> > > based on current active contributions I feel that this is going against
> > the
> > > Apache Way (whether I like it or not)[8][9] and, esp. for the project,
> I
> > > feel hurts us when considering a genuine goal of moving to a TLP. We
> > should
> > > instead use this as an opportunity to further embed Apache Apex into
> the
> > > Apache Way and define what “inactivity” means for a (P)PMC Member and a
> > > Committer.
> > > >
> > > > Another point I’ve heard is that we want Apex to be very open to new
> > > Committers which is amazing, but I want to make a point here that I,
> as a
> > > current PPMC Member, wouldn’t want to be giving away Committership like
> > > candy. I would much rather see the Apache Way and its concept of
> > > Meritocracy[10] in action. Moreover we, as a community, still haven’t
> > > defined (that I know of) a strong set of guidelines that any individual
> > can
> > > follow to earn said merit in the project and become a Committer. This
> > > certainly shouldn't be construed as a bad thing since we are still a
> > > relatively young project and need to work these things out (and I’m
> sure
> > we
> > > will :) ).
> > > >
> > > > So, what are my recommendations?
> > > >
> > > > 1. Keep the current PPMC and Committer list as they are
> > > > 2. Establish a set of guidelines on what it takes to be a Committer
> > > > 3. Establish a set of roles and responsibilities for a Committer on
> > > Apache Apex
> > > > 4. Establish #2 and #3 for a (P)PMC Member as well
> > > > 5. Most importantly, establish a set of guidelines on what
> “inactivity”
> > > means for (P)PMC Members and Committers
> > > >
> > > > Also, because I didn’t want to clog the actual vote thread, I’ve
> > > restarted this thread. Forgive me if that upsets anyone.
> > > >
> > > > I want to end by saying that this is my first foray in the Apache
> > > project lifecycle, the Apache Way, and the general way Apache governs a
> > > project. That said I have no clue how other projects have succeeded or
> > > failed in the past with these issues, but I can only assume that this
> is
> > > certainly not the first time something like this has happened for a
> > project
> > > (nor the last) and I, for one, am confident that no matter what the
> > > decision is we, as a community, will continue to strive for what is
> best
> > > for Apache Apex to grow into a truly successful project.
> > > >
> > > > Phew, that was a bit long. Candid feedback welcome and appreciated.
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > > http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Roles_and_Responsibilities.html
> > > > [2] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html
> > > > [3] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/committer.html
> > > > [4]
> > >
> >
> http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Roles+in+the+Incubation+Process
> > > > [5] http://apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html
> > > > [6] http://apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#committers
> > > > [7] http://apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#pmc-members
> > > > [8] http://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html#pmc-removal
> > > > [9] http://www.apache.org/dev/committers.html#committer-set-term
> > > > [10] http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#meritocracy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> On Nov 11, 2015, at 3:49 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <pt...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> +1
> > > >>
> > > >> I've seen references in email threads to the effect that there are 6
> > > people that are/were supposed to form the PPMC, but I've not seen a
> list
> > of
> > > who those individuals are. Granted, I may have missed it and I haven't
> > done
> > > an exhaustive search of the mailing lists.
> > > >>
> > > >> As Justin mentioned, only PPMC member votes are binding for things
> > like
> > > a release, so we need to know this information. We may also have to
> > revoke
> > > karma, but I'd have to check on that.
> > > >>
> > > >> Again, my apologies if that list was discussed/documented and I
> missed
> > > it.
> > > >>
> > > >> -Taylor
> > > >>
> > > >>> On Nov 11, 2015, at 6:28 PM, Justin Mclean <ju...@me.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Hi,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Also remember that a main practice difference between committer and
> > > PPMC is that only PPMC votes are binding on releases. Committer votes
> are
> > > not binding. I see a lot of votes on Malhar release that state they are
> > > binding when perhaps they may not depending who exactly is in the PPMC.
> > > Would be good to clear this confusion up.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Thanks,
> > > >>> Justin
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________________________________
> > > >
> > > > The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and/or
> > > proprietary to Capital One and/or its affiliates and may only be used
> > > solely in performance of work or services for Capital One. The
> > information
> > > transmitted herewith is intended only for use by the individual or
> entity
> > > to which it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the
> > intended
> > > recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission,
> > > dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of, or taking of any
> > > action in reliance upon this information is strictly prohibited. If you
> > > have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> and
> > > delete the material from your computer.
> > >
> >
>