You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Rob Weir <ap...@robweir.com> on 2011/06/24 15:48:33 UTC
Contributors versus Committers versus PMC members
Since almost all of us are new to Apache we're learning a lot about
how Apache projects organize themselves. Based on my reading, I
understand that Apache projects have three degrees of participation:
1) Developer (or Contributor might be the preferred term, since it
doesn't depend on coding), who is a project member that contributes
patches, helps with support, reports bugs, etc. The main thing they
cannot do is commit changes directly to the product repository. They
need to submit patches, which are then reviewed and checked in by a
"committer".
2) Committers are elected based on their sustained contributions to
the project. They have an apache userid and email alias. They can
commit changes to the repository. They are also responsible for
reviewing patches submitted by other contributors. A Committer must
have an ICLA on file.
3) Project Management Committee (PMC) are Committers or Contributors
who are elected, based on merit, to help provide oversight to the
project. They approve releases and elected new Committers and PMC
members.
As the Apache OpenOffice podling was bootstrapped, all of the
volunteers who signed up on the wiki, before the vote, were
automatically able to become Commtters and PPMC members. But to
actually take on those roles, a number of steps needed to occur,
mainly dependent on the new member submitting the Apache ICLA. Once
that is done, account creation, etc. takes some time, but is routine.
What we need to decide going forward is how we define the details of
the Contributor/Committer/PPMC roles.
Specifically:
1) In the future, will all Committers be PPMC members? In other
words, will these two groups be identical? I've heard that other
Apache projects have a subset of Committers serve on the PMC, but they
rotate membership, so all Committers get a chance to be on the PMC.
2) If the Committer and PPMC groups are not identical, then what
criteria should we use to determine who becomes a PPMC member?
3) If someone is offered the role of Committer, how long do they have
to sign ICLA?
4) If someone is an incredible contributor to the project, say in
testing or event planning, can they become a PPMC member? Would they
need to sign the ICLA even if they are never actually need to commit
project resources? In other words, can someone be a PMC member
without being a Committer? Or should we think of these as being
progressive degrees of involvement, strictly Contributor --> Committer
--> PMC member?
5) Is there an term limit on PPMC membership, or criterion for
sustained contributions and activity level? In other words, is it a
case of "Once elected, always a PMC member"?
6) Similar for Committers. Is there a minimum threshold level of
activity that is needed to sustain that role?
-Rob
Re: Contributors versus Committers versus PMC members
Posted by Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org>.
Clarifications inline.
On 6/24/2011 11:21 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> Hello Rob, * -- see below
>
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 6:48 AM, Rob Weir<ap...@robweir.com> wrote:
>
>> Since almost all of us are new to Apache we're learning a lot about
>> how Apache projects organize themselves. Based on my reading, I
>> understand that Apache projects have three degrees of participation:
>>
>> 1) Developer (or Contributor might be the preferred term, since it
>> doesn't depend on coding), who is a project member that contributes
>> patches, helps with support, reports bugs, etc. The main thing they
>> cannot do is commit changes directly to the product repository. They
>> need to submit patches, which are then reviewed and checked in by a
>> "committer".
>>
>> 2) Committers are elected based on their sustained contributions to
>> the project. They have an apache userid and email alias. They can
>> commit changes to the repository. They are also responsible for
>> reviewing patches submitted by other contributors. A Committer must
>> have an ICLA on file.
>>
>
> What "substantially" is the difference between #1 and #2? I mean in terms of
> actual actions. I submitted a CLA yesterday, and was told I needed to "voted
> in", presumably for #1....
Apache projects are based on merit. If you show merit - i.e. are
working constructively over a period of time on the project's lists,
submitting patches, working on the wiki, whatever - then the project's
(P)PMC will notice, hopefully have a [VOTE], and will offer you a spot
as a committer. Being a committer on a project is not something you can
get by simply requesting, it's something offered by the PMC, once you
have shown you have an active interest in continuing to work on the project.
> What I would LIKE to do is make some simple changes
> to what Apache considers our "primary" web site,
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html
>
> for this, I am told/see, I need an Apache userid, which to my knowledge i do
> not have. So, how to to go about this...
For the time being, the best thing to do is provide some patches.
Patches using subversion for the site itself are easiest, but it'd still
be a good start to see specific descriptions and text that you'd propose
adding to specific pages.
And see below as to what the "primary" website is.
>
>
>> 3) Project Management Committee (PMC) are Committers or Contributors
>> who are elected, based on merit, to help provide oversight to the
>> project. They approve releases and elected new Committers and PMC
>> members.
>>
>
> With respect to this. One of the first things I would put on our "new" site
> is the actual list of our PMC along with some better instructions as to what
> one is supposed to do.
Yes, projects should always have a "Team" or "Who we are" section on the
website. Actually, that should probably be part of the branding
requirements, since the aspect of the community behind a project is a
key part of the Apache Way...
> I am still VERY confused over the use of
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/
>
> vs
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html
This distinction is for all podlings, because they are not yet -
technically - Apache projects. Thus podlings need to publish two sets
of information: the obvious homepage, for the public; and separately,
metadata about how the project is governing itself, for the Incubator.
http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html is metadata
about the *project* and community status, and IP clearances, etc. as a
future Apache project. The audience is the Incubator PMC - who will
decide in the future if this podling is ready to graduate - and in
particular for this project's PPMC, who are responsible for ensuring all
the checklist items on that page are completed, to show that this
podling is functioning properly by Apache rules.
You're probably more interested in
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/, which is the public-facing
homepage of the project, and is what the rest of the world should be
looking at to learn about where Apache OpenOffice is going.
>
>
> but if you look at any of the other Apache project websites, I think you'll
> get a general idea of the "look and feel" of them.
Note that the look and feel is up to each project to decide for itself.
There are a set of minimal branding requirements - things like
trademarks, links to the main apache.org site, etc. that are required,
but otherwise, it's up to each project to decide what and how to build
it's website(s).
- Shane
>
> OK, I KNOW we have a LOT to discuss. But, I would just like to "fix up" the
> main site a bit, so people coming over to have a look, actually have
> something reasonable to look at and have some idea about what's going on.
>
> Thanks, and please vote me in for an Apache ID. :)
>
>
>> As the Apache OpenOffice podling was bootstrapped, all of the
>> volunteers who signed up on the wiki, before the vote, were
>> automatically able to become Commtters and PPMC members. But to
>> actually take on those roles, a number of steps needed to occur,
>> mainly dependent on the new member submitting the Apache ICLA. Once
>> that is done, account creation, etc. takes some time, but is routine.
>>
>> What we need to decide going forward is how we define the details of
>> the Contributor/Committer/PPMC roles.
>>
>
> yes...some of this is already defined vis a vis Apache, but I don't know how
> they're maintained.
>
>
>>
>> Specifically:
>>
>> 1) In the future, will all Committers be PPMC members? In other
>> words, will these two groups be identical? I've heard that other
>> Apache projects have a subset of Committers serve on the PMC, but they
>> rotate membership, so all Committers get a chance to be on the PMC.
>>
>
> Boy, I would not think this group would be identical. The PPMC votes on all
> new additions. I think it might unwieldy, but ???
>
>
>> 2) If the Committer and PPMC groups are not identical, then what
>> criteria should we use to determine who becomes a PPMC member?
>>
>
> maybe define a structure for the PPMC and vote on the PPMC membership from
> the current community?
>
>
>> 3) If someone is offered the role of Committer, how long do they have
>> to sign ICLA?
>>
>> 4) If someone is an incredible contributor to the project, say in
>> testing or event planning, can they become a PPMC member? Would they
>> need to sign the ICLA even if they are never actually need to commit
>> project resources? In other words, can someone be a PMC member
>> without being a Committer?
>
>
> why not?
>
>
>> Or should we think of these as being
>> progressive degrees of involvement, strictly Contributor --> Committer
>> --> PMC member?
>>
>
> Well I don't see why. I see PMC more as "managers" but that's just my
> opinion.
>
>
>>
>> 5) Is there an term limit on PPMC membership, or criterion for
>> sustained contributions and activity level? In other words, is it a
>> case of "Once elected, always a PMC member"?
>>
>> 6) Similar for Committers. Is there a minimum threshold level of
>> activity that is needed to sustain that role?
>>
>
> good question...and one that should be addressed if no other reason then
> security to the site(s).
>
>
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>
>
>
Re: Contributors versus Committers versus PMC members
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
Hi Rob--
On 06/24/2011 09:09 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 11:21 AM, Kay Schenk<ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello Rob, * -- see below
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 6:48 AM, Rob Weir<ap...@robweir.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Since almost all of us are new to Apache we're learning a lot about
>>> how Apache projects organize themselves. Based on my reading, I
>>> understand that Apache projects have three degrees of participation:
>>>
>>> 1) Developer (or Contributor might be the preferred term, since it
>>> doesn't depend on coding), who is a project member that contributes
>>> patches, helps with support, reports bugs, etc. The main thing they
>>> cannot do is commit changes directly to the product repository. They
>>> need to submit patches, which are then reviewed and checked in by a
>>> "committer".
>>>
>>> 2) Committers are elected based on their sustained contributions to
>>> the project. They have an apache userid and email alias. They can
>>> commit changes to the repository. They are also responsible for
>>> reviewing patches submitted by other contributors. A Committer must
>>> have an ICLA on file.
>>>
>> What "substantially" is the difference between #1 and #2? I mean in terms of
>> actual actions. I submitted a CLA yesterday, and was told I needed to "voted
>> in", presumably for #1. What I would LIKE to do is make some simple changes
>> to what Apache considers our "primary" web site,
>>
>> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html
>>
>> for this, I am told/see, I need an Apache userid, which to my knowledge i do
>> not have. So, how to to go about this...
>>
> Hello Kay!
>
> A Developer/Contributor submits patches, which then are reviewed and
> applied by a Committer. A Committer can also make his or her own
> updates directly in the repository. That is why they need to sign the
> ICLA and have an Apache userid.
>
> Of course, up until now, everyone has been a Committer, since everyone
> who signed up with the initial proposal was automatically made a
> committer.
>
>
> So.... Would you like to be the *First Contributor* to submit a patch
> for this project? This would be great practice for the current
> Committers as well, to receive, review and apply patches.
Yes! I will review all of this discussion and see what I can do in the
next few days!
Thanks for the opportunity and I apologize for my lack of knowledge and
protocol.
later...
>
>>> 3) Project Management Committee (PMC) are Committers or Contributors
>>> who are elected, based on merit, to help provide oversight to the
>>> project. They approve releases and elected new Committers and PMC
>>> members.
>>>
>> With respect to this. One of the first things I would put on our "new" site
>> is the actual list of our PMC along with some better instructions as to what
>> one is supposed to do.
>>
>> I am still VERY confused over the use of
>>
>> http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/
>>
>> vs
>>
>> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html
>>
> Projects under incubation have special attention given to them by the
> Apache Incubator PMC and the mentors who volunteer to help us get
> started. The first page is the page that the Incubation PMC uses to
> track our status. There is a page like this for every "podling" in
> the incubator.
>
> The 2nd web page is the website that the project controls. Once we
> graduate from incubation and become a top level project (TLP) that
> will change to something like openoffice.apache.org.
>
>> but if you look at any of the other Apache project websites, I think you'll
>> get a general idea of the "look and feel" of them.
>>
>> OK, I KNOW we have a LOT to discuss. But, I would just like to "fix up" the
>> main site a bit, so people coming over to have a look, actually have
>> something reasonable to look at and have some idea about what's going on.
>>
> OK. That would be great. I assume you are talking about this site:
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html
>
> Are you familiar with Subversion? If so, you can download the source
> for the site here:
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/site
>
> If you don't know subversion, let us know as well, and we'll point you
> in the right direction.
>
>
>> Thanks, and please vote me in for an Apache ID. :)
>>
>>
> I'll make you a deal. Give me 5 good patches and I'll nominate you
> for Committer. Of course, someone else might nominate you for only 2
> patches ;-)
>
> But it all starts with submitting that first patch.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"He's got that New Orleans thing crawling all over him, that good stuff,
that 'We Are the Champions', to hell with the rest and
I'll just start over kind of attitude."
-- "1 Dead in the Attic", Chris Rose
Re: Contributors versus Committers versus PMC members
Posted by Rob Weir <ap...@robweir.com>.
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 11:21 AM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello Rob, * -- see below
>
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 6:48 AM, Rob Weir <ap...@robweir.com> wrote:
>
>> Since almost all of us are new to Apache we're learning a lot about
>> how Apache projects organize themselves. Based on my reading, I
>> understand that Apache projects have three degrees of participation:
>>
>> 1) Developer (or Contributor might be the preferred term, since it
>> doesn't depend on coding), who is a project member that contributes
>> patches, helps with support, reports bugs, etc. The main thing they
>> cannot do is commit changes directly to the product repository. They
>> need to submit patches, which are then reviewed and checked in by a
>> "committer".
>>
>> 2) Committers are elected based on their sustained contributions to
>> the project. They have an apache userid and email alias. They can
>> commit changes to the repository. They are also responsible for
>> reviewing patches submitted by other contributors. A Committer must
>> have an ICLA on file.
>>
>
> What "substantially" is the difference between #1 and #2? I mean in terms of
> actual actions. I submitted a CLA yesterday, and was told I needed to "voted
> in", presumably for #1. What I would LIKE to do is make some simple changes
> to what Apache considers our "primary" web site,
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html
>
> for this, I am told/see, I need an Apache userid, which to my knowledge i do
> not have. So, how to to go about this...
>
Hello Kay!
A Developer/Contributor submits patches, which then are reviewed and
applied by a Committer. A Committer can also make his or her own
updates directly in the repository. That is why they need to sign the
ICLA and have an Apache userid.
Of course, up until now, everyone has been a Committer, since everyone
who signed up with the initial proposal was automatically made a
committer.
So.... Would you like to be the *First Contributor* to submit a patch
for this project? This would be great practice for the current
Committers as well, to receive, review and apply patches.
>
>> 3) Project Management Committee (PMC) are Committers or Contributors
>> who are elected, based on merit, to help provide oversight to the
>> project. They approve releases and elected new Committers and PMC
>> members.
>>
>
> With respect to this. One of the first things I would put on our "new" site
> is the actual list of our PMC along with some better instructions as to what
> one is supposed to do.
>
> I am still VERY confused over the use of
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/
>
> vs
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html
>
Projects under incubation have special attention given to them by the
Apache Incubator PMC and the mentors who volunteer to help us get
started. The first page is the page that the Incubation PMC uses to
track our status. There is a page like this for every "podling" in
the incubator.
The 2nd web page is the website that the project controls. Once we
graduate from incubation and become a top level project (TLP) that
will change to something like openoffice.apache.org.
>
> but if you look at any of the other Apache project websites, I think you'll
> get a general idea of the "look and feel" of them.
>
> OK, I KNOW we have a LOT to discuss. But, I would just like to "fix up" the
> main site a bit, so people coming over to have a look, actually have
> something reasonable to look at and have some idea about what's going on.
>
OK. That would be great. I assume you are talking about this site:
http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html
Are you familiar with Subversion? If so, you can download the source
for the site here:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/site
If you don't know subversion, let us know as well, and we'll point you
in the right direction.
> Thanks, and please vote me in for an Apache ID. :)
>
>
I'll make you a deal. Give me 5 good patches and I'll nominate you
for Committer. Of course, someone else might nominate you for only 2
patches ;-)
But it all starts with submitting that first patch.
Regards,
-Rob
Re: Contributors versus Committers versus PMC members
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On 06/24/2011 12:26 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Kay Schenk<ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> OK, yes, I saw this. Really I was confused as to what should be considered
>> the "main site". I made some changes to what is currently the "main"
>> Openoffice.org site --- www.openoffice.org -- and based on this additional
>> explanation, I will change that site again to follow this.
>>
> That is a good question. I have my opinion, but others may have
> different thoughts.
>
> If we look at the existing OpenOffice.org, we see a mix of services,
> and maybe can divide it into two categories:
>
> - Pages and services that are used by the project volunteers (dev, qa,
> translation, marketing, UI, support education, etc.) to build,
> distribute and promote OpenOffice
>
> - Pages and services used by the users of OpenOffice (downloads,
> tutorials, online documentation, etc.)
>
> I think we need a plan to preserve all the needed user-facing pages,
> and to preserve all the incoming links to those pages from other
> websites. Yahoo reports that there are 1.2 million "backlinks" to
> OpenOffice.org. We don't want to break those links. So as we move
> these services to Apache, we'll need to have a good set of mod_rewrite
> rules to redirect browsers to the right pages.
Pretty daunting.
> We'll also need a "project website" for the resources that the project
> volunteers need access to. That will probably remain at an Apache
> address, like openoffice.apache.org. I believe that
> http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/ is the equivalent of our
> "project page" right now.
>
> So are you interested in the user-facing website? Or the Apache
> project website? Or do you think we should consider a different
> model?
I don't have an opinion regarding an alternative model. My former role
was simply that of a web hack for the most part with development ONLY as
it applied to web pages, i.e. javascript, etc. As a "contributor" my
main interest is in this area --
Pages and services used by the users of OpenOffice (downloads,
tutorials, online documentation, etc.)
What you're calling the user-facing website I guess. So, are you
planning on actually preserving, whre they currently are, the "user
facing" site? VERY recently, it was ported to kenai which most of us are
just now trying to learn.
One thing you need to be aware of and which I was going to add to the
wiki "list" is the mirrors project and how you think that should
interact with the new code development area. I don't know anything
about that but Tora, who just joined the list, does.
> -Ro b
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"He's got that New Orleans thing crawling all over him, that good stuff,
that 'We Are the Champions', to hell with the rest and
I'll just start over kind of attitude."
-- "1 Dead in the Attic", Chris Rose
Re: Contributors versus Committers versus PMC members
Posted by Rob Weir <ap...@robweir.com>.
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> OK, yes, I saw this. Really I was confused as to what should be considered
> the "main site". I made some changes to what is currently the "main"
> Openoffice.org site --- www.openoffice.org -- and based on this additional
> explanation, I will change that site again to follow this.
>
That is a good question. I have my opinion, but others may have
different thoughts.
If we look at the existing OpenOffice.org, we see a mix of services,
and maybe can divide it into two categories:
- Pages and services that are used by the project volunteers (dev, qa,
translation, marketing, UI, support education, etc.) to build,
distribute and promote OpenOffice
- Pages and services used by the users of OpenOffice (downloads,
tutorials, online documentation, etc.)
I think we need a plan to preserve all the needed user-facing pages,
and to preserve all the incoming links to those pages from other
websites. Yahoo reports that there are 1.2 million "backlinks" to
OpenOffice.org. We don't want to break those links. So as we move
these services to Apache, we'll need to have a good set of mod_rewrite
rules to redirect browsers to the right pages.
We'll also need a "project website" for the resources that the project
volunteers need access to. That will probably remain at an Apache
address, like openoffice.apache.org. I believe that
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/ is the equivalent of our
"project page" right now.
So are you interested in the user-facing website? Or the Apache
project website? Or do you think we should consider a different
model?
-Ro b
Re: Contributors versus Committers versus PMC members
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
Hi Dave...
On 06/24/2011 08:51 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> On Jun 24, 2011, at 8:21 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>
>> Hello Rob, * -- see below
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 6:48 AM, Rob Weir<ap...@robweir.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Since almost all of us are new to Apache we're learning a lot about
>>> how Apache projects organize themselves. Based on my reading, I
>>> understand that Apache projects have three degrees of participation:
>>>
>>> 1) Developer (or Contributor might be the preferred term, since it
>>> doesn't depend on coding), who is a project member that contributes
>>> patches, helps with support, reports bugs, etc. The main thing they
>>> cannot do is commit changes directly to the product repository. They
>>> need to submit patches, which are then reviewed and checked in by a
>>> "committer".
>>>
>>> 2) Committers are elected based on their sustained contributions to
>>> the project. They have an apache userid and email alias. They can
>>> commit changes to the repository. They are also responsible for
>>> reviewing patches submitted by other contributors. A Committer must
>>> have an ICLA on file.
>>>
>> What "substantially" is the difference between #1 and #2? I mean in terms of
>> actual actions. I submitted a CLA yesterday, and was told I needed to "voted
>> in", presumably for #1.
> You do not need to be voted for #1.
>
> For #1 you submit your work as patches, through the community wiki (documentation), or the issue tracker (not decided yet)
OK...
> You get voted on for #2 and an ICLA on file helps speed the process.
>
> Once you are a Committer you are trusted to make changes on your won.
>
>> What I would LIKE to do is make some simple changes
>> to what Apache considers our "primary" web site,
>>
>> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html
> This is the podling status page and is a checklist for the podling's progress through the Incubator. AFAIK this can only be changed by someone on the Incubator PMC. I was going to ask about this, as it needs an update of the Wiki links and progress.
>
>> for this, I am told/see, I need an Apache userid, which to my knowledge i do
>> not have. So, how to to go about this...
> You must be voted on by the PPMC to become a Committer.
>
> Here are instructions for editing the Main site. - http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/developer-faqs.html
>
> I see these ought to explain how to submit a patch for the markdown text.
OK, yes, I saw this. Really I was confused as to what should be
considered the "main site". I made some changes to what is currently the
"main" Openoffice.org site --- www.openoffice.org -- and based on this
additional explanation, I will change that site again to follow this.
> If you have a patch then send an email with [PATCH] in the subject to ooo-dev and an svn diff in the content. A committer should pick it up. A patch can be prepared using "svn diff". See other threads for svn help.
>
> Does this help?
Well...I think so. Still a big foggy but really as a long-time
participant, I just wanted to steer folks continuing to go to
www.openoffice.org in the right direction for continued participation
and to make their arrival at the new destination seem inviting.
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>>
>>> 3) Project Management Committee (PMC) are Committers or Contributors
>>> who are elected, based on merit, to help provide oversight to the
>>> project. They approve releases and elected new Committers and PMC
>>> members.
>>>
>> With respect to this. One of the first things I would put on our "new" site
>> is the actual list of our PMC along with some better instructions as to what
>> one is supposed to do.
>>
>> I am still VERY confused over the use of
>>
>> http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/
>>
>> vs
>>
>> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html
>>
>>
>> but if you look at any of the other Apache project websites, I think you'll
>> get a general idea of the "look and feel" of them.
>>
>> OK, I KNOW we have a LOT to discuss. But, I would just like to "fix up" the
>> main site a bit, so people coming over to have a look, actually have
>> something reasonable to look at and have some idea about what's going on.
>>
>> Thanks, and please vote me in for an Apache ID. :)
>>
>>
>>> As the Apache OpenOffice podling was bootstrapped, all of the
>>> volunteers who signed up on the wiki, before the vote, were
>>> automatically able to become Commtters and PPMC members. But to
>>> actually take on those roles, a number of steps needed to occur,
>>> mainly dependent on the new member submitting the Apache ICLA. Once
>>> that is done, account creation, etc. takes some time, but is routine.
>>>
>>> What we need to decide going forward is how we define the details of
>>> the Contributor/Committer/PPMC roles.
>>>
>> yes...some of this is already defined vis a vis Apache, but I don't know how
>> they're maintained.
>>
>>
>>> Specifically:
>>>
>>> 1) In the future, will all Committers be PPMC members? In other
>>> words, will these two groups be identical? I've heard that other
>>> Apache projects have a subset of Committers serve on the PMC, but they
>>> rotate membership, so all Committers get a chance to be on the PMC.
>>>
>> Boy, I would not think this group would be identical. The PPMC votes on all
>> new additions. I think it might unwieldy, but ???
>>
>>
>>> 2) If the Committer and PPMC groups are not identical, then what
>>> criteria should we use to determine who becomes a PPMC member?
>>>
>> maybe define a structure for the PPMC and vote on the PPMC membership from
>> the current community?
>>
>>
>>> 3) If someone is offered the role of Committer, how long do they have
>>> to sign ICLA?
>>>
>>> 4) If someone is an incredible contributor to the project, say in
>>> testing or event planning, can they become a PPMC member? Would they
>>> need to sign the ICLA even if they are never actually need to commit
>>> project resources? In other words, can someone be a PMC member
>>> without being a Committer?
>>
>> why not?
>>
>>
>>> Or should we think of these as being
>>> progressive degrees of involvement, strictly Contributor --> Committer
>>> --> PMC member?
>>>
>> Well I don't see why. I see PMC more as "managers" but that's just my
>> opinion.
>>
>>
>>> 5) Is there an term limit on PPMC membership, or criterion for
>>> sustained contributions and activity level? In other words, is it a
>>> case of "Once elected, always a PMC member"?
>>>
>>> 6) Similar for Committers. Is there a minimum threshold level of
>>> activity that is needed to sustain that role?
>>>
>> good question...and one that should be addressed if no other reason then
>> security to the site(s).
>>
>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> MzK
>>
>> "He's got that New Orleans thing crawling all over him, that good stuff,
>> that
>> 'We Are the Champions', to hell with the rest and I'll just start over kind
>> of attitude."
>> � "1 Dead in the Attic", Chris Rose
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"He's got that New Orleans thing crawling all over him, that good stuff,
that 'We Are the Champions', to hell with the rest and
I'll just start over kind of attitude."
-- "1 Dead in the Attic", Chris Rose
Re: Contributors versus Committers versus PMC members
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Jun 24, 2011, at 8:21 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> Hello Rob, * -- see below
>
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 6:48 AM, Rob Weir <ap...@robweir.com> wrote:
>
>> Since almost all of us are new to Apache we're learning a lot about
>> how Apache projects organize themselves. Based on my reading, I
>> understand that Apache projects have three degrees of participation:
>>
>> 1) Developer (or Contributor might be the preferred term, since it
>> doesn't depend on coding), who is a project member that contributes
>> patches, helps with support, reports bugs, etc. The main thing they
>> cannot do is commit changes directly to the product repository. They
>> need to submit patches, which are then reviewed and checked in by a
>> "committer".
>>
>> 2) Committers are elected based on their sustained contributions to
>> the project. They have an apache userid and email alias. They can
>> commit changes to the repository. They are also responsible for
>> reviewing patches submitted by other contributors. A Committer must
>> have an ICLA on file.
>>
>
> What "substantially" is the difference between #1 and #2? I mean in terms of
> actual actions. I submitted a CLA yesterday, and was told I needed to "voted
> in", presumably for #1.
You do not need to be voted for #1.
For #1 you submit your work as patches, through the community wiki (documentation), or the issue tracker (not decided yet)
You get voted on for #2 and an ICLA on file helps speed the process.
Once you are a Committer you are trusted to make changes on your won.
> What I would LIKE to do is make some simple changes
> to what Apache considers our "primary" web site,
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html
This is the podling status page and is a checklist for the podling's progress through the Incubator. AFAIK this can only be changed by someone on the Incubator PMC. I was going to ask about this, as it needs an update of the Wiki links and progress.
> for this, I am told/see, I need an Apache userid, which to my knowledge i do
> not have. So, how to to go about this...
You must be voted on by the PPMC to become a Committer.
Here are instructions for editing the Main site. - http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/developer-faqs.html
I see these ought to explain how to submit a patch for the markdown text.
If you have a patch then send an email with [PATCH] in the subject to ooo-dev and an svn diff in the content. A committer should pick it up. A patch can be prepared using "svn diff". See other threads for svn help.
Does this help?
Regards,
Dave
>
>
>> 3) Project Management Committee (PMC) are Committers or Contributors
>> who are elected, based on merit, to help provide oversight to the
>> project. They approve releases and elected new Committers and PMC
>> members.
>>
>
> With respect to this. One of the first things I would put on our "new" site
> is the actual list of our PMC along with some better instructions as to what
> one is supposed to do.
>
> I am still VERY confused over the use of
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/
>
> vs
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html
>
>
> but if you look at any of the other Apache project websites, I think you'll
> get a general idea of the "look and feel" of them.
>
> OK, I KNOW we have a LOT to discuss. But, I would just like to "fix up" the
> main site a bit, so people coming over to have a look, actually have
> something reasonable to look at and have some idea about what's going on.
>
> Thanks, and please vote me in for an Apache ID. :)
>
>
>> As the Apache OpenOffice podling was bootstrapped, all of the
>> volunteers who signed up on the wiki, before the vote, were
>> automatically able to become Commtters and PPMC members. But to
>> actually take on those roles, a number of steps needed to occur,
>> mainly dependent on the new member submitting the Apache ICLA. Once
>> that is done, account creation, etc. takes some time, but is routine.
>>
>> What we need to decide going forward is how we define the details of
>> the Contributor/Committer/PPMC roles.
>>
>
> yes...some of this is already defined vis a vis Apache, but I don't know how
> they're maintained.
>
>
>>
>> Specifically:
>>
>> 1) In the future, will all Committers be PPMC members? In other
>> words, will these two groups be identical? I've heard that other
>> Apache projects have a subset of Committers serve on the PMC, but they
>> rotate membership, so all Committers get a chance to be on the PMC.
>>
>
> Boy, I would not think this group would be identical. The PPMC votes on all
> new additions. I think it might unwieldy, but ???
>
>
>> 2) If the Committer and PPMC groups are not identical, then what
>> criteria should we use to determine who becomes a PPMC member?
>>
>
> maybe define a structure for the PPMC and vote on the PPMC membership from
> the current community?
>
>
>> 3) If someone is offered the role of Committer, how long do they have
>> to sign ICLA?
>>
>> 4) If someone is an incredible contributor to the project, say in
>> testing or event planning, can they become a PPMC member? Would they
>> need to sign the ICLA even if they are never actually need to commit
>> project resources? In other words, can someone be a PMC member
>> without being a Committer?
>
>
> why not?
>
>
>> Or should we think of these as being
>> progressive degrees of involvement, strictly Contributor --> Committer
>> --> PMC member?
>>
>
> Well I don't see why. I see PMC more as "managers" but that's just my
> opinion.
>
>
>>
>> 5) Is there an term limit on PPMC membership, or criterion for
>> sustained contributions and activity level? In other words, is it a
>> case of "Once elected, always a PMC member"?
>>
>> 6) Similar for Committers. Is there a minimum threshold level of
>> activity that is needed to sustain that role?
>>
>
> good question...and one that should be addressed if no other reason then
> security to the site(s).
>
>
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
>
> "He's got that New Orleans thing crawling all over him, that good stuff,
> that
> 'We Are the Champions', to hell with the rest and I'll just start over kind
> of attitude."
> — "1 Dead in the Attic", Chris Rose
Re: Contributors versus Committers versus PMC members
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
Hello Rob, * -- see below
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 6:48 AM, Rob Weir <ap...@robweir.com> wrote:
> Since almost all of us are new to Apache we're learning a lot about
> how Apache projects organize themselves. Based on my reading, I
> understand that Apache projects have three degrees of participation:
>
> 1) Developer (or Contributor might be the preferred term, since it
> doesn't depend on coding), who is a project member that contributes
> patches, helps with support, reports bugs, etc. The main thing they
> cannot do is commit changes directly to the product repository. They
> need to submit patches, which are then reviewed and checked in by a
> "committer".
>
> 2) Committers are elected based on their sustained contributions to
> the project. They have an apache userid and email alias. They can
> commit changes to the repository. They are also responsible for
> reviewing patches submitted by other contributors. A Committer must
> have an ICLA on file.
>
What "substantially" is the difference between #1 and #2? I mean in terms of
actual actions. I submitted a CLA yesterday, and was told I needed to "voted
in", presumably for #1. What I would LIKE to do is make some simple changes
to what Apache considers our "primary" web site,
http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html
for this, I am told/see, I need an Apache userid, which to my knowledge i do
not have. So, how to to go about this...
> 3) Project Management Committee (PMC) are Committers or Contributors
> who are elected, based on merit, to help provide oversight to the
> project. They approve releases and elected new Committers and PMC
> members.
>
With respect to this. One of the first things I would put on our "new" site
is the actual list of our PMC along with some better instructions as to what
one is supposed to do.
I am still VERY confused over the use of
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/
vs
http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html
but if you look at any of the other Apache project websites, I think you'll
get a general idea of the "look and feel" of them.
OK, I KNOW we have a LOT to discuss. But, I would just like to "fix up" the
main site a bit, so people coming over to have a look, actually have
something reasonable to look at and have some idea about what's going on.
Thanks, and please vote me in for an Apache ID. :)
> As the Apache OpenOffice podling was bootstrapped, all of the
> volunteers who signed up on the wiki, before the vote, were
> automatically able to become Commtters and PPMC members. But to
> actually take on those roles, a number of steps needed to occur,
> mainly dependent on the new member submitting the Apache ICLA. Once
> that is done, account creation, etc. takes some time, but is routine.
>
> What we need to decide going forward is how we define the details of
> the Contributor/Committer/PPMC roles.
>
yes...some of this is already defined vis a vis Apache, but I don't know how
they're maintained.
>
> Specifically:
>
> 1) In the future, will all Committers be PPMC members? In other
> words, will these two groups be identical? I've heard that other
> Apache projects have a subset of Committers serve on the PMC, but they
> rotate membership, so all Committers get a chance to be on the PMC.
>
Boy, I would not think this group would be identical. The PPMC votes on all
new additions. I think it might unwieldy, but ???
> 2) If the Committer and PPMC groups are not identical, then what
> criteria should we use to determine who becomes a PPMC member?
>
maybe define a structure for the PPMC and vote on the PPMC membership from
the current community?
> 3) If someone is offered the role of Committer, how long do they have
> to sign ICLA?
>
> 4) If someone is an incredible contributor to the project, say in
> testing or event planning, can they become a PPMC member? Would they
> need to sign the ICLA even if they are never actually need to commit
> project resources? In other words, can someone be a PMC member
> without being a Committer?
why not?
> Or should we think of these as being
> progressive degrees of involvement, strictly Contributor --> Committer
> --> PMC member?
>
Well I don't see why. I see PMC more as "managers" but that's just my
opinion.
>
> 5) Is there an term limit on PPMC membership, or criterion for
> sustained contributions and activity level? In other words, is it a
> case of "Once elected, always a PMC member"?
>
> 6) Similar for Committers. Is there a minimum threshold level of
> activity that is needed to sustain that role?
>
good question...and one that should be addressed if no other reason then
security to the site(s).
>
> -Rob
>
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"He's got that New Orleans thing crawling all over him, that good stuff,
that
'We Are the Champions', to hell with the rest and I'll just start over kind
of attitude."
— "1 Dead in the Attic", Chris Rose
Re: Contributors versus Committers versus PMC members
Posted by Donald Whytock <dw...@gmail.com>.
Is the PMC for a podling different from the PMC for the resulting
project? Should it be? Or should the PPMC simply roll into their new
role as a PMC?
Don
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Rob Weir <ap...@robweir.com> wrote:
> Since almost all of us are new to Apache we're learning a lot about
> how Apache projects organize themselves. Based on my reading, I
> understand that Apache projects have three degrees of participation:
>
> 1) Developer (or Contributor might be the preferred term, since it
> doesn't depend on coding), who is a project member that contributes
> patches, helps with support, reports bugs, etc. The main thing they
> cannot do is commit changes directly to the product repository. They
> need to submit patches, which are then reviewed and checked in by a
> "committer".
>
> 2) Committers are elected based on their sustained contributions to
> the project. They have an apache userid and email alias. They can
> commit changes to the repository. They are also responsible for
> reviewing patches submitted by other contributors. A Committer must
> have an ICLA on file.
>
> 3) Project Management Committee (PMC) are Committers or Contributors
> who are elected, based on merit, to help provide oversight to the
> project. They approve releases and elected new Committers and PMC
> members.
>
> As the Apache OpenOffice podling was bootstrapped, all of the
> volunteers who signed up on the wiki, before the vote, were
> automatically able to become Commtters and PPMC members. But to
> actually take on those roles, a number of steps needed to occur,
> mainly dependent on the new member submitting the Apache ICLA. Once
> that is done, account creation, etc. takes some time, but is routine.
>
> What we need to decide going forward is how we define the details of
> the Contributor/Committer/PPMC roles.
>
> Specifically:
>
> 1) In the future, will all Committers be PPMC members? In other
> words, will these two groups be identical? I've heard that other
> Apache projects have a subset of Committers serve on the PMC, but they
> rotate membership, so all Committers get a chance to be on the PMC.
>
> 2) If the Committer and PPMC groups are not identical, then what
> criteria should we use to determine who becomes a PPMC member?
>
> 3) If someone is offered the role of Committer, how long do they have
> to sign ICLA?
>
> 4) If someone is an incredible contributor to the project, say in
> testing or event planning, can they become a PPMC member? Would they
> need to sign the ICLA even if they are never actually need to commit
> project resources? In other words, can someone be a PMC member
> without being a Committer? Or should we think of these as being
> progressive degrees of involvement, strictly Contributor --> Committer
> --> PMC member?
>
> 5) Is there an term limit on PPMC membership, or criterion for
> sustained contributions and activity level? In other words, is it a
> case of "Once elected, always a PMC member"?
>
> 6) Similar for Committers. Is there a minimum threshold level of
> activity that is needed to sustain that role?
>
> -Rob
>
Re: Contributors versus Committers versus PMC members
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>.
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 10:35 AM, Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org> wrote:
>
>> 3) Project Management Committee (PMC) are Committers or Contributors
>> who are elected, based on merit, to help provide oversight to the
>> project. They approve releases and elected new Committers and PMC
>> members.
>
> PMC members are almost always existing committers, since it's rare to elect
> someone to control the strategic direction of a project unless they've
> already been a committer for a while - but it's certainly possible. Note
> that we probably would want an iCLA in any case.
I would suggest "oversight" or perhaps "management" in place of
"control the strategic direction". In particular, you won't find
discussions about topics like functional requirements on the private
list.
More information as to the role and proper operation of the PMC can be
found here:
http://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html#audience
- Sam Ruby
Re: Contributors versus Committers versus PMC members
Posted by Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org>.
Great overview, Rob. The roles at Apache projects are also documented
here, which may be useful to read as well:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#roles
Does anyone have links or an explanation of the "org chart" of the
OpenOffice.org project? It would be helpful for us Apache folk to have
a better understanding of how some things were done in the past on the
previous project.
On 6/24/2011 9:48 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
> Since almost all of us are new to Apache we're learning a lot about
> how Apache projects organize themselves. Based on my reading, I
> understand that Apache projects have three degrees of participation:
Plus users! All Apache projects have a users@/user@ mailing list where
user level questions are asked and answered. Given OOo's focus, I
imagine we may have a number of lists or forums for this kind of support
in the future. Note that Apache prefers mailing lists (with public
archives in a number of places) to forums, although this is not a strict
rule.
> 1) Developer (or Contributor might be the preferred term, since it
> doesn't depend on coding), who is a project member that contributes
> patches, helps with support, reports bugs, etc. The main thing they
> cannot do is commit changes directly to the product repository. They
> need to submit patches, which are then reviewed and checked in by a
> "committer".
Given the breadth of OOo, I think there may be a significant number of
people who serve as contributors, working on documentation,
translations, and user-focused areas.
> 2) Committers are elected based on their sustained contributions to
> the project. They have an apache userid and email alias. They can
> commit changes to the repository. They are also responsible for
> reviewing patches submitted by other contributors. A Committer must
> have an ICLA on file.
Committers are elected (by the PMC) based on the merit of their public
contributions to the project itself. Each PMC has it's own bar, or
level of contribution, expected from developers before being proposed
and voted in as committers.
Note that iCLAs are required for all committers, which ensures clean IP
for any project(s) they commit to. Committer access is granted
separately for every project; merit from one project is not necessarily
transferrable to other projects.
> 3) Project Management Committee (PMC) are Committers or Contributors
> who are elected, based on merit, to help provide oversight to the
> project. They approve releases and elected new Committers and PMC
> members.
PMC members are almost always existing committers, since it's rare to
elect someone to control the strategic direction of a project unless
they've already been a committer for a while - but it's certainly
possible. Note that we probably would want an iCLA in any case.
> As the Apache OpenOffice podling was bootstrapped, all of the
> volunteers who signed up on the wiki, before the vote, were
> automatically able to become Commtters and PPMC members. But to
> actually take on those roles, a number of steps needed to occur,
> mainly dependent on the new member submitting the Apache ICLA. Once
> that is done, account creation, etc. takes some time, but is routine.
>
> What we need to decide going forward is how we define the details of
> the Contributor/Committer/PPMC roles.
>
> Specifically:
>
> 1) In the future, will all Committers be PPMC members? In other
> words, will these two groups be identical? I've heard that other
> Apache projects have a subset of Committers serve on the PMC, but they
> rotate membership, so all Committers get a chance to be on the PMC.
Given the breadth of work on OOo, I would imagine PPMC would be a subset
of committers, although that's a decision up to the project. I don't
know of many (any?) projects that rotate PMC membership; normally once
people are elected to the PMC they remain on it (until they choose to
leave due to not having time to contribute).
PPMC/PMC membership changes work like this:
- PMC votes to elect a new member
- PMC chair emails board@ with vote result asking for an ACK
- A director replies to the email with an ACK, and notes a 72 hour
waiting period
- After 72 hours, the PMC chair adds the new PMC member to the official
PMC roster
Note that changing the chair of a PMC (who is also a Vice President of
the ASF) requires a board resolution, which is done at monthly board
meetings.
> 2) If the Committer and PPMC groups are not identical, then what
> criteria should we use to determine who becomes a PPMC member?
Committers can manipulate/vote on the code. PPMC members vote on new
committers, new PPMC members, and project releases.
Personally, I view committers as people trusted to help work on the
code. PPMC/PMC members are people trusted to *actively* plan the
strategy for the project, and who are somehow willing to help out on the
larger scale, either with testing and voting on releases, being
responsible for some product area, or whatever. But again, that's up to
the project to decide as a community.
> 3) If someone is offered the role of Committer, how long do they have
> to sign ICLA?
Up to the project, but if they don't sign an iCLA then infrastructure
won't give them an Apache id.
> 4) If someone is an incredible contributor to the project, say in
> testing or event planning, can they become a PPMC member? Would they
> need to sign the ICLA even if they are never actually need to commit
> project resources? In other words, can someone be a PMC member
> without being a Committer? Or should we think of these as being
> progressive degrees of involvement, strictly Contributor --> Committer
> --> PMC member?
Previous code contributions are not required for PMC membership; the PMC
is free to decide what kinds of merit are sufficient to vote in a new
member. Having an iCLA isn't strictly a requirement, but it would be
strange to have a PMC member without one. iCLAs are also required for
an Apache id.
> 5) Is there an term limit on PPMC membership, or criterion for
> sustained contributions and activity level? In other words, is it a
> case of "Once elected, always a PMC member"?
Up to the project. Most projects expect that PMC members can remain
indefinitely. Many projects have an ad hoc process where they
occasionally ping PMC members who have not been present for a while to
ask if they want to remain on the PMC or not.
> 6) Similar for Committers. Is there a minimum threshold level of
> activity that is needed to sustain that role?
Up to the project. Most projects allow committers to remain indefinitely.
>
> -Rob
Excellent questions, by the way.
- Shane
Re: Contributors versus Committers versus PMC members
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 06/24/2011 03:48 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
> Since almost all of us are new to Apache we're learning a lot about
> how Apache projects organize themselves. Based on my reading, I
> understand that Apache projects have three degrees of participation:
0) Users that are just working with the software. Since this is the most
wanted thing we want to reach, IMHO we shouldn't forget for whom we are
doing all this stuff.
Especially when these users are also talking about the software (and/or
the project, too) and therefor are spreading the word about OOo, we
should count them to the circle of participants.
> 1) - 3)
ACK
> What we need to decide going forward is how we define the details of
> the Contributor/Committer/PPMC roles.
>
> Specifically:
>
> 1) In the future, will all Committers be PPMC members? In other
> words, will these two groups be identical? I've heard that other
> Apache projects have a subset of Committers serve on the PMC, but they
> rotate membership, so all Committers get a chance to be on the PMC.
Compared with the former project we had the Engineering Steering
Committee that has - more or less detailed - showed the direction.
I could think of to continue this kind of hierachry. So, the (P)PMC is
for guiding the way and the users/developers/committers can help to
reach this. Then of course the committee group shouldn't be to large and
could have members which are rotating from the committers/developers group.
> 2) If the Committer and PPMC groups are not identical, then what
> criteria should we use to determine who becomes a PPMC member?
IMHO in any case he has to be voted.
> 3) If someone is offered the role of Committer, how long do they have
> to sign ICLA?
Yes, good question. Somone has talked here on the list about 2 months.
That sounds find, especially when we have to take the CCLA into account,
too, and companies need more time than just filling-out and sending by
mail/fax.
> 4) If someone is an incredible contributor to the project, say in
> testing or event planning, can they become a PPMC member? Would they
> need to sign the ICLA even if they are never actually need to commit
> project resources?
No, if it is really QA'ing or planning/attending events as this is not
copyrighted. So, it depends on what he's doing.
> In other words, can someone be a PMC member
> without being a Committer?
IMHO yes
> 5) Is there an term limit on PPMC membership, or criterion for
> sustained contributions and activity level? In other words, is it a
> case of "Once elected, always a PMC member"?
PMC member for life-time? Sounds great, but it's very likey not good for
the project. ;-)
> 6) Similar for Committers. Is there a minimum threshold level of
> activity that is needed to sustain that role?
Indeed a good question.
When someone contributed a very good thing and 10 years later there is
nothing new, is he still a committer?
Marcus