You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by Alex Blewitt <Al...@ioshq.com> on 2003/09/10 19:50:34 UTC

Comments on committer process

This is actually following the ASF process. Until a committer nominates 
it, then it isn't a part of the process, but we can use the message 
title to identify people who are interested in becoming commiters.

So it's the ASF process, nothing more, nothing less. The only thing I 
proposed is building a list of interested people in such a way that 
those things can be tracked.

To avoid cluttering this thread with cruft, please change the subject 
of the message so that we can track that thread separately.

Thanks,

Alex.

On Wednesday, Sep 10, 2003, at 18:47 Europe/London, Cabrera, Alan wrote:

> Guys, is this even up for debate?  This is an Apache project and I 
> would
> think must follow the Apache rules.  I think that some of the more 
> senior
> Apache members were very clear on this.
>
> Alan
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Alex Blewitt [mailto:Alex.Blewitt@ioshq.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 1:42 PM
>> To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Who wants to be a committer?
>>
>>
>> So, a new process; if you are interested in becoming a committer, and
>> have submitted enough code/contributions/become a member of the
>> community, simply reply to this message title. Please do not reply to
>> this same message title if you are not interested in becoming a
>> committer, or are not a committer replying.
>>
>> Once you've announced your intent, can a committer then post
>> a reply to
>> this, officially proposing a vote for that person. This will
>> kick-start
>> the normal ASF processes which I'm sure we'd all want to
>> follow anyway.
>>
>> To make it clearer, I suggest that message titles are as follows:
>>
>> Who wants to be a committer? <- this message
>> Re: Who wants to be a commiter? Alex Blewitt <- people who are
>> interested in nominating themselves
>> [Vote] Re: Who wants to be a committer? Alex Blewitt <- a committer
>> will have to officially launch the voting process off
>> Re: [Vote] Re: Who wants to be a committer? Alex Blewitt <- responses
>> from other people (committers have the only binding votes,
>> but support
>> from the community is also a good indication)
>>
>> Alex.
>>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>       Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com
>
> Get closer to the financial markets with Reuters Messaging - for more
> information and to register, visit <http://www.reuters.com/messaging>
>
> Any views expressed in this message are those of  the  individual 
> sender,
> except  where  the sender specifically states them to be the views of 
> The
> Reuters Group.


Re: Comments on committer process

Posted by Jason Dillon <ja...@coredevelopers.net>.
Um, I don't know... just an example of how it might work... defs not 
perfect ;-)

--jason


On Thursday, September 11, 2003, at 02:40  AM, Brian Behlendorf wrote:

>
> OK, so who's going to look through every revision to make sure that
> everyone correctly added their vote, and didn't accidentally remove
> someone else's vote?
>
> 	Brian
>
> On Thu, 11 Sep 2003, Jason Dillon wrote:
>> True wiki is volatile, but there are revision diffs for that.
>>
>> --jason
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, September 11, 2003, at 01:49  AM, Berin Loritsch wrote:
>>
>>> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Was thinking of using the wiki as a place for votes in general...
>>>>> easier to manage IMO.
>>>> NO!
>>>> Now for the explanation.  :-)  I am a big fan of Wiki, but it does 
>>>> not
>>>> replace the mailing list.  The mailing list should be used for
>>>> discussion,
>>>> and MUST be used for voting.  The mailing lists are archived and
>>>> provide an
>>>> paper trail.  They are a record of the project.
>>>
>>> not to mention the volatility of the wiki.  ANYONE can change it
>>> however they
>>> like.
>>>
>>> It is ok for capturing a _snapshot_ of an ongoing conversation (i.e.
>>> the
>>> latest and greatest design of a system).  Things like that tend to 
>>> get
>>> a
>>> bit muddled on the mailing list over time, so a WIKI with the latest
>>> and
>>> greatest status helps out a heap.
>>>
>>> For votes and such, the wiki is the wrong tool for the job.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
>>> safety
>>>  deserve neither liberty nor safety."
>>>                 - Benjamin Franklin
>>>
>>
>


Re: Comments on committer process

Posted by Brian Behlendorf <br...@collab.net>.
OK, so who's going to look through every revision to make sure that
everyone correctly added their vote, and didn't accidentally remove
someone else's vote?

	Brian

On Thu, 11 Sep 2003, Jason Dillon wrote:
> True wiki is volatile, but there are revision diffs for that.
>
> --jason
>
>
> On Thursday, September 11, 2003, at 01:49  AM, Berin Loritsch wrote:
>
> > Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> >
> >>> Was thinking of using the wiki as a place for votes in general...
> >>> easier to manage IMO.
> >> NO!
> >> Now for the explanation.  :-)  I am a big fan of Wiki, but it does not
> >> replace the mailing list.  The mailing list should be used for
> >> discussion,
> >> and MUST be used for voting.  The mailing lists are archived and
> >> provide an
> >> paper trail.  They are a record of the project.
> >
> > not to mention the volatility of the wiki.  ANYONE can change it
> > however they
> > like.
> >
> > It is ok for capturing a _snapshot_ of an ongoing conversation (i.e.
> > the
> > latest and greatest design of a system).  Things like that tend to get
> > a
> > bit muddled on the mailing list over time, so a WIKI with the latest
> > and
> > greatest status helps out a heap.
> >
> > For votes and such, the wiki is the wrong tool for the job.
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
> > safety
> >  deserve neither liberty nor safety."
> >                 - Benjamin Franklin
> >
>

Re: Comments on committer process

Posted by Jason Dillon <ja...@coredevelopers.net>.
True wiki is volatile, but there are revision diffs for that.

--jason


On Thursday, September 11, 2003, at 01:49  AM, Berin Loritsch wrote:

> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>
>>> Was thinking of using the wiki as a place for votes in general...
>>> easier to manage IMO.
>> NO!
>> Now for the explanation.  :-)  I am a big fan of Wiki, but it does not
>> replace the mailing list.  The mailing list should be used for 
>> discussion,
>> and MUST be used for voting.  The mailing lists are archived and 
>> provide an
>> paper trail.  They are a record of the project.
>
> not to mention the volatility of the wiki.  ANYONE can change it 
> however they
> like.
>
> It is ok for capturing a _snapshot_ of an ongoing conversation (i.e. 
> the
> latest and greatest design of a system).  Things like that tend to get 
> a
> bit muddled on the mailing list over time, so a WIKI with the latest 
> and
> greatest status helps out a heap.
>
> For votes and such, the wiki is the wrong tool for the job.
>
>
> -- 
>
> "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary 
> safety
>  deserve neither liberty nor safety."
>                 - Benjamin Franklin
>


Re: Comments on committer process

Posted by Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org>.
Noel J. Bergman wrote:

>>Was thinking of using the wiki as a place for votes in general...
>>easier to manage IMO.
> 
> 
> NO!
> 
> Now for the explanation.  :-)  I am a big fan of Wiki, but it does not
> replace the mailing list.  The mailing list should be used for discussion,
> and MUST be used for voting.  The mailing lists are archived and provide an
> paper trail.  They are a record of the project.
> 

not to mention the volatility of the wiki.  ANYONE can change it however they
like.

It is ok for capturing a _snapshot_ of an ongoing conversation (i.e. the
latest and greatest design of a system).  Things like that tend to get a
bit muddled on the mailing list over time, so a WIKI with the latest and
greatest status helps out a heap.

For votes and such, the wiki is the wrong tool for the job.


-- 

"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
  deserve neither liberty nor safety."
                 - Benjamin Franklin


Re: Comments on committer process

Posted by Jason Dillon <ja...@coredevelopers.net>.
> Now for the explanation.  :-)  I am a big fan of Wiki, but it does not
> replace the mailing list.  The mailing list should be used for 
> discussion,
> and MUST be used for voting.  The mailing lists are archived and 
> provide an
> paper trail.  They are a record of the project.

Wiki is also backed up and has revision history.  I am all for using 
mailing list + wiki for voting.  I find it a huge pain to dig through 
emails to find out what the result of a vote was.

With the wiki we can see the binding and non-binding votes easily as 
well as have the wiki tally up the votes and so on.

--jason


Re: Comments on committer process

Posted by Richard Monson-Haefel <Ri...@Monson-Haefel.com>.
On 9/10/03 8:11 PM, in article
B375C32A-E405-11D7-8601-000A9566A360@coredevelopers.net, "Jason Dillon"
<ja...@coredevelopers.net> wrote:

>>> I think we should have person opening the vote create a summary on he
>>> wiki and I think we should have the person aggregating the vote log
>>> the
>>> final summary on the wiki.  This way we can have the formal record in
>>> the email and an easy to read record in the wiki.  The best of both
>>> worlds for only twice the work :)
>>> 
>>> -dain
>> 
>> +1 To ensure that the Wiki accurately reflects the final vote tally
>> from the
>> mailing list, only the aggregating person can be the last person to
>> have
>> edited the page. If someone (i.e. A non-committer) modifies the page,
>> it
>> should be disregarded or rolled back.
> 
> Can setup an #acl on the page so only the person who started the vote
> (and therefor responsible for handling the outcome) can edit the file.
> 
> --jason
> 
> 
Excellent. Perhaps the vote on how committers are added is a good test case
for this Wiki vote summary thingy. My Wiki skills are pretty sad. Can
someone create the first vote summary ... I'm assuming that we are done
voting on how committers are added.



Re: Comments on committer process

Posted by Jason Dillon <ja...@coredevelopers.net>.
>> I think we should have person opening the vote create a summary on he
>> wiki and I think we should have the person aggregating the vote log 
>> the
>> final summary on the wiki.  This way we can have the formal record in
>> the email and an easy to read record in the wiki.  The best of both
>> worlds for only twice the work :)
>>
>> -dain
>
> +1 To ensure that the Wiki accurately reflects the final vote tally 
> from the
> mailing list, only the aggregating person can be the last person to 
> have
> edited the page. If someone (i.e. A non-committer) modifies the page, 
> it
> should be disregarded or rolled back.

Can setup an #acl on the page so only the person who started the vote 
(and therefor responsible for handling the outcome) can edit the file.

--jason


Re: Comments on committer process

Posted by Richard Monson-Haefel <Ri...@Monson-Haefel.com>.
On 9/10/03 12:49 PM, in article
EA8E6576-E3C7-11D7-B8F0-000393DB559A@coredevelopers.net, "Dain Sundstrom"
<da...@coredevelopers.net> wrote:

> I think it is a great idea to keep a summary of votes on the wiki, but
> I believe that we are required (i.e., not even an option... end of
> story) to vote on the mailing list.

+1 (I was tempted to put +2 as a joke, but decided against it.)

> 
> I think we should have person opening the vote create a summary on he
> wiki and I think we should have the person aggregating the vote log the
> final summary on the wiki.  This way we can have the formal record in
> the email and an easy to read record in the wiki.  The best of both
> worlds for only twice the work :)
> 
> -dain

+1 To ensure that the Wiki accurately reflects the final vote tally from the
mailing list, only the aggregating person can be the last person to have
edited the page. If someone (i.e. A non-committer) modifies the page, it
should be disregarded or rolled back.



Re: Comments on committer process

Posted by Jason Dillon <ja...@coredevelopers.net>.
> I think it is a great idea to keep a summary of votes on the wiki, but 
> I believe that we are required (i.e., not even an option... end of 
> story) to vote on the mailing list.

Agreed.  I know it is a MUST to vote on the list, but would really like 
to see the wiki reflect the votes too.


> I think we should have person opening the vote create a summary on he 
> wiki and I think we should have the person aggregating the vote log 
> the final summary on the wiki.  This way we can have the formal record 
> in the email and an easy to read record in the wiki.  The best of both 
> worlds for only twice the work :)

;-)

A little more work for much better results IMO.

--jason


Re: Comments on committer process

Posted by Dain Sundstrom <da...@coredevelopers.net>.
I think it is a great idea to keep a summary of votes on the wiki, but 
I believe that we are required (i.e., not even an option... end of 
story) to vote on the mailing list.

I think we should have person opening the vote create a summary on he 
wiki and I think we should have the person aggregating the vote log the 
final summary on the wiki.  This way we can have the formal record in 
the email and an easy to read record in the wiki.  The best of both 
worlds for only twice the work :)

-dain

On Wednesday, September 10, 2003, at 02:31 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:

> I setup an example for how a wiki voting system could work here: 
> http://wiki.codehaus.org/geronimo/Voting
>
> My main issue with email only voting is that it is hard to manage who 
> voted & what there vote was with out digging a whole lot.
>
> Plus with MoinMoin it is possible to use ACL to control who can write 
> to the page, and is possible to let someone vote with out having to 
> edit the page, though need to write a special action/macro to handle 
> that.
>
> I personally would like to see voting done in email & then finalized 
> on the wiki page so it is easy for anyone to see what is going on, 
> what has been voted on and what is currently open for votes.
>
> --jason
>
>
> On Thursday, September 11, 2003, at 01:41  AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>
>>> Was thinking of using the wiki as a place for votes in general...
>>> easier to manage IMO.
>>
>> NO!
>>
>> Now for the explanation.  :-)  I am a big fan of Wiki, but it does not
>> replace the mailing list.  The mailing list should be used for 
>> discussion,
>> and MUST be used for voting.  The mailing lists are archived and 
>> provide an
>> paper trail.  They are a record of the project.
>>
>> 	--- Noel
>>
>
>

/*************************
  * Dain Sundstrom
  * Partner
  * Core Developers Network
  *************************/


Re: Comments on committer process

Posted by Jason Dillon <ja...@coredevelopers.net>.
I setup an example for how a wiki voting system could work here: 
http://wiki.codehaus.org/geronimo/Voting

My main issue with email only voting is that it is hard to manage who 
voted & what there vote was with out digging a whole lot.

Plus with MoinMoin it is possible to use ACL to control who can write 
to the page, and is possible to let someone vote with out having to 
edit the page, though need to write a special action/macro to handle 
that.

I personally would like to see voting done in email & then finalized on 
the wiki page so it is easy for anyone to see what is going on, what 
has been voted on and what is currently open for votes.

--jason


On Thursday, September 11, 2003, at 01:41  AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:

>> Was thinking of using the wiki as a place for votes in general...
>> easier to manage IMO.
>
> NO!
>
> Now for the explanation.  :-)  I am a big fan of Wiki, but it does not
> replace the mailing list.  The mailing list should be used for 
> discussion,
> and MUST be used for voting.  The mailing lists are archived and 
> provide an
> paper trail.  They are a record of the project.
>
> 	--- Noel
>


RE: Comments on committer process

Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
> Was thinking of using the wiki as a place for votes in general...
> easier to manage IMO.

NO!

Now for the explanation.  :-)  I am a big fan of Wiki, but it does not
replace the mailing list.  The mailing list should be used for discussion,
and MUST be used for voting.  The mailing lists are archived and provide an
paper trail.  They are a record of the project.

	--- Noel


Re: Comments on committer process

Posted by Jason Dillon <ja...@coredevelopers.net>.
Was thinking of using the wiki as a place for votes in general... 
easier to manage IMO.

--jason


On Thursday, September 11, 2003, at 12:54  AM, Siva wrote:

> How abt a wiki page for the wanna-be committers?
>
> Siva
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alex Blewitt" <Al...@ioshq.com>
> To: <ge...@incubator.apache.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 11:20 PM
> Subject: Comments on committer process
>
>
>> This is actually following the ASF process. Until a committer 
>> nominates
>> it, then it isn't a part of the process, but we can use the message
>> title to identify people who are interested in becoming commiters.
>>
>> So it's the ASF process, nothing more, nothing less. The only thing I
>> proposed is building a list of interested people in such a way that
>> those things can be tracked.
>>
>> To avoid cluttering this thread with cruft, please change the subject
>> of the message so that we can track that thread separately.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Alex.
>>
>


Re: Comments on committer process

Posted by Siva <si...@sivasundaram.com>.
How abt a wiki page for the wanna-be committers?

Siva
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Alex Blewitt" <Al...@ioshq.com>
To: <ge...@incubator.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 11:20 PM
Subject: Comments on committer process


> This is actually following the ASF process. Until a committer nominates 
> it, then it isn't a part of the process, but we can use the message 
> title to identify people who are interested in becoming commiters.
> 
> So it's the ASF process, nothing more, nothing less. The only thing I 
> proposed is building a list of interested people in such a way that 
> those things can be tracked.
> 
> To avoid cluttering this thread with cruft, please change the subject 
> of the message so that we can track that thread separately.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Alex.
> 

Re: Comments on committer process

Posted by Alex Blewitt <Al...@ioshq.com>.
I'm pretty sure that a vote can precede the signing though, but with 
the obvious case that it doesn't go through until the form is received.

Alex.

On Wednesday, Sep 10, 2003, at 18:57 Europe/London, Jim Jagielski wrote:

> Just a FYI:
>
> No one can be a committer until they have a signed Contributor
> License Agreement on file.
>
> They can be found at:
>
>   http://incubator.apache.org/forms/ASF_Contributor_License_2_form.pdf
>


Re: Comments on committer process

Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com>.
Just a FYI:

No one can be a committer until they have a signed Contributor
License Agreement on file.

They can be found at:

   http://incubator.apache.org/forms/ASF_Contributor_License_2_form.pdf