Re: more committers

[Upayavira <uv...@odoko.co.uk>]

On Mon, 2008-12-29 at 16:40 +0100, Esteve Fernandez wrote: 
> On Sunday 28 December 2008 23:37:09 Ian Holsman wrote:
> > In general in an apache project, the process for getting people commit
> > access is for an existing 'PMC' member to recognize the merits of an
> > individual and raise it on the private list, where it is discussed.  It
> > is discussed in private as some people may feel that the person is not
> > ready yet, and saying that in public could discourage the individual.
> > "nominating" the person on a public list is generally seen as poor form,
> > as it might preempt the discussion, and lead to no response from the
> > project.
> 
> Sorry if my actions caused any trouble. I'm not a PMC member and shouldn't 
> have nominated Bryan or Todd before asking about the process.

Not a problem. Given these discussions happen in private (one of the few
things that does/should in the ASF), there's no way for those outside to
know how they happen.

> However, I'm still arguing for more reviewers/committers in general, I think 
> Thrift's development is being hindered by the lack of people who can act on 
> tickets, which leads to external people become frustrated and to not 
> participate more actively. For example, THRIFT-129 (the most popular ticket) 
> was reported on 2008-09-02 and last updated on 2008-10-23, but nobody 
> committed the attached patch.

You may be right that Thrift needs new committers. However, that is an
issue that I will leave to the Thrift committers to discuss/address.

Upayavira

Re: more committers

[Jérémie BORDIER <ah...@gmail.com>]

I can't agree more... I'm quite new to thrift, submitting my first
patches but i was a bit disappointed by the lack of activity of the
committers / maintainers.. Patches are available and validated for
ages now without being applied, which makes all the people looking at
thrift doubtful about contributing and about the quality of the
current branch. Diving into the cpplib is quite straight forward but
some tricky points and important architecture decisions require
support from the cpp lib maintainers that arn't very available, making
things hard to be done..

-- 
Jérémie

On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 7:45 PM, Bryan Duxbury <br...@rapleaf.com> wrote:
> Perhaps more than anything, this thread should be viewed as a call to action
> for the existing PMC. Perhaps I don't know, since I'm also not in on the
> "private" discussions, but it certainly feels like nothing is being done at
> all. I wouldn't even be concerned about being a committer if it wasn't for
> the fact that I have to be very annoying to a David and Kevin to get my
> patches incorporated. Less tenacious individuals have clearly attached a
> patch or two and then disappeared for want of attention.
>
> I think if we want this project to succeed in the long run, we need to be
> active and responsive. If the people in charge are unwilling or unable to do
> that, then I'd just appreciate it if they could hand it off to those who
> will dedicate the time.
>
> -Bryan
>
> On Jan 2, 2009, at 2:51 AM, Upayavira wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 2008-12-29 at 16:40 +0100, Esteve Fernandez wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sunday 28 December 2008 23:37:09 Ian Holsman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In general in an apache project, the process for getting people commit
>>>> access is for an existing 'PMC' member to recognize the merits of an
>>>> individual and raise it on the private list, where it is discussed.  It
>>>> is discussed in private as some people may feel that the person is not
>>>> ready yet, and saying that in public could discourage the individual.
>>>> "nominating" the person on a public list is generally seen as poor form,
>>>> as it might preempt the discussion, and lead to no response from the
>>>> project.
>>>
>>> Sorry if my actions caused any trouble. I'm not a PMC member and
>>> shouldn't
>>> have nominated Bryan or Todd before asking about the process.
>>
>> Not a problem. Given these discussions happen in private (one of the few
>> things that does/should in the ASF), there's no way for those outside to
>> know how they happen.
>>
>>> However, I'm still arguing for more reviewers/committers in general, I
>>> think
>>> Thrift's development is being hindered by the lack of people who can act
>>> on
>>> tickets, which leads to external people become frustrated and to not
>>> participate more actively. For example, THRIFT-129 (the most popular
>>> ticket)
>>> was reported on 2008-09-02 and last updated on 2008-10-23, but nobody
>>> committed the attached patch.
>>
>> You may be right that Thrift needs new committers. However, that is an
>> issue that I will leave to the Thrift committers to discuss/address.
>>
>> Upayavira
>>
>>
>
>



-- 
Jérémie 'ahFeel' BORDIER

Re: more committers

[Doug Cutting <cu...@apache.org>]

Bryan Duxbury wrote:
> Perhaps more than anything, this thread should be viewed as a call to 
> action for the existing PMC. Perhaps I don't know, since I'm also not in 
> on the "private" discussions, but it certainly feels like nothing is 
> being done at all.

As you guessed, you are not missing much.  And an incubating project 
with most of its committers from a single company should strive hard to 
add new committers.

In other Apache projects that I'm involved with, we generally nominate 
contributors to become committers when they have:
  - contributed a series of high-quality, non-trivial patches; and
  - demonstrated that they are easy to work with.

Looking at the contributions report (http://tinyurl.com/a2mrzy) I see a 
few folks who've contributed lots of patches but who have not yet been 
proposed as committers.  From a glance at the interactions, these folks 
do not appear to be hard to work with, but I cannot claim to have 
followed Thrift closely enough to be sure, nor to nominate any myself. 
But it does seem like some of the more active committers might strongly 
consider nominating a few folks on thrift-private@.

Doug

Re: more committers

[Bryan Duxbury <br...@rapleaf.com>]

Perhaps more than anything, this thread should be viewed as a call to  
action for the existing PMC. Perhaps I don't know, since I'm also not  
in on the "private" discussions, but it certainly feels like nothing  
is being done at all. I wouldn't even be concerned about being a  
committer if it wasn't for the fact that I have to be very annoying  
to a David and Kevin to get my patches incorporated. Less tenacious  
individuals have clearly attached a patch or two and then disappeared  
for want of attention.

I think if we want this project to succeed in the long run, we need  
to be active and responsive. If the people in charge are unwilling or  
unable to do that, then I'd just appreciate it if they could hand it  
off to those who will dedicate the time.

-Bryan

On Jan 2, 2009, at 2:51 AM, Upayavira wrote:

> On Mon, 2008-12-29 at 16:40 +0100, Esteve Fernandez wrote:
>> On Sunday 28 December 2008 23:37:09 Ian Holsman wrote:
>>> In general in an apache project, the process for getting people  
>>> commit
>>> access is for an existing 'PMC' member to recognize the merits of an
>>> individual and raise it on the private list, where it is  
>>> discussed.  It
>>> is discussed in private as some people may feel that the person  
>>> is not
>>> ready yet, and saying that in public could discourage the  
>>> individual.
>>> "nominating" the person on a public list is generally seen as  
>>> poor form,
>>> as it might preempt the discussion, and lead to no response from the
>>> project.
>>
>> Sorry if my actions caused any trouble. I'm not a PMC member and  
>> shouldn't
>> have nominated Bryan or Todd before asking about the process.
>
> Not a problem. Given these discussions happen in private (one of  
> the few
> things that does/should in the ASF), there's no way for those  
> outside to
> know how they happen.
>
>> However, I'm still arguing for more reviewers/committers in  
>> general, I think
>> Thrift's development is being hindered by the lack of people who  
>> can act on
>> tickets, which leads to external people become frustrated and to not
>> participate more actively. For example, THRIFT-129 (the most  
>> popular ticket)
>> was reported on 2008-09-02 and last updated on 2008-10-23, but nobody
>> committed the attached patch.
>
> You may be right that Thrift needs new committers. However, that is an
> issue that I will leave to the Thrift committers to discuss/address.
>
> Upayavira
>
>