stevenn 2003/07/29 01:32:29
Modified: src/documentation/content/xdocs site.xml
Added: src/documentation/content/xdocs guidelines.xml
Log:
draft Cocoon Project guidelines as a discussion starter - copied verbatim
from Jakarta guidelines
Revision Changes Path
1.9 +1 -0 cocoon-site/src/documentation/content/xdocs/site.xml
Index: site.xml
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvs/cocoon-site/src/documentation/content/xdocs/site.xml,v
retrieving revision 1.8
retrieving revision 1.9
diff -u -r1.8 -r1.9
--- site.xml 3 Jul 2003 14:25:02 -0000 1.8
+++ site.xml 29 Jul 2003 08:32:29 -0000 1.9
@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
<about label="About Cocoon">
<index label="Welcome" href="index.html"/>
<whoweare label="Who we are" href="whoweare.html"/>
+ <guidelines label="Draft guidelines" href="guidelines.html"/>
<history label="History" href="history.html"/>
<news label="News" href="news/">
<overview label="Latest" href="index.html"/>
1.1
cocoon-site/src/documentation/content/xdocs/guidelines.xml
Index: guidelines.xml
===================================================================
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE document PUBLIC "-//APACHE//DTD Documentation V1.2//EN"
"document-v12.dtd">
<document>
<header>
<title>Cocoon Project Guidelines - DRAFT</title>
</header>
<body>
<warning>DRAFT INITIAL VERSION - these guidelines have not been voted upon
yet!</warning>
<p>This document defines the guidelines of the Apache Cocoon Project and
its subprojects. It includes definitions of the various categories of
membership, who is able to vote, how conflicts are resolved by voting, and
the procedures to follow for proposing and making changes to the codebases
of the Project. Each subproject may adopt additional guidelines, which may
extend but not supercede the Project guidelines.</p>
<section>
<title>Roles & Responsibilities</title>
<p>The roles and responsibilities that people can assume in the project
are based on merit. Everybody can help no matter what their role. Those
who have been long term or valuable contributors to the project obtain
the right to vote and commit directly to the source repository.</p>
<section>
<title>Users</title>
<p>Users are the people who use the products of the Project. People in
this role aren't contributing code, but they are using the
products, reporting bugs, making feature requests, helping other
users, extending the online FAQ, and such. This is by far the most
important category of people as, without users, there is no reason for
the Project.</p>
<p>When a user starts to contribute code or documentation patches,
they become a developer.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Contributors</title>
<p>Contributors are the people who write code or documentation patches
or contribute positively to the project in other ways. A
volunteer's contribution is always recognized. <code>In source
code, all volunteers who contribute to a source file may add their
name to the list of authors for that file.</code></p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Committers</title>
<p>Contributors who give frequent and valuable contributions to a
subproject of the Project can have their status promoted to that of a
<em>"Committer"</em> for that subproject. A Committer has
write access to the source code repository and gains voting rights
allowing them to affect the future of the subproject.</p>
<p>In order for a Contributor to become a Committer, another Committer
can nominate that Contributor or the Contributor can ask for it. Once
a Contributor is nominated, all of the Committers for a subproject
will vote. If there are at least 3 positive votes and no negative
votes, the Contributor is converted into a Committer and given write
access to the source code repository for that subproject. Before
receiving write access, a Committer must also affirm that they have
read and understood these guidelines, and agree to abide by their
terms, as they may be revised from time to time.</p>
<p>At times, Committers may go inactive for a variety of reasons. A
Committer that has been inactive for 6 months or more may lose his or
her status as a Committer.</p>
<p><code>A list of our current Committers can be found in our Project
Credits.</code></p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Project Management Committee (PMC)</title>
<p>Committers who frequently participate with valuable contributions
may have their status promoted to that of a <em>"Project
Management Committee Member"</em>. This committee is the official
managing body of the Apache Cocoon Project and is responsible for
setting overall project direction. <code>For more about the Apache
Cocoon PMC, see the Project Management Committee bylaws. A list of our
current PMC Members can be found in our Project Credits.</code></p>
</section>
</section>
<section>
<title>Communication </title>
<p>The Project obtains its strength from the communication of its
members. In order for members to easily communicate with each other, the
Project has a variety of mailing lists. These lists, with the exception
of the announcement lists, are not moderated and anybody is more than
welcome to join them. However, you must be subscribed to post to a
list.</p>
<p>To reduce the bandwidth demands on everyone, mail should not contain
attachments. It is recommended that you place interesting material (such
as patches) either within the body of the message or provide a URL for
retrieval.</p>
<p>To join the mailing lists, see our Mailing List page.</p>
<p>The Project's list fall into the following categories:</p>
<section>
<title>Announcement Lists</title>
<p>Announcement lists are very low traffic designed to communicate
important information, such as final releases of a subproject's
code, to a wide audience.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>User Lists</title>
<p>User lists are for users of a product to converse about such things
as configuration and operating of the products of the Project.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Developer Lists</title>
<p>Developer lists are for the contributors to the project. On these
lists suggestions and comments for code changes are discussed and
action items are raised and voted on. For the developer community,
these lists are the very center of the project where all the
"action" is.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Commit Lists</title>
<p>The commit lists are where all CVS code commit messages are sent.
All committers are required to subscribe to this list so that they can
stay aware of changes to the repository.</p>
</section>
</section>
<section>
<title>Decision Making</title>
<p>All Contributors are encouraged to participate in decisions, but the
decision itself is made by those that have Committer status in the
Project. In other words, the Project is a <em>"Minimum Threshold
Meritocracy"</em>.</p>
<section>
<title>Action Items</title>
<p>All decisions revolve around <em>"action items"</em>. Most
action items require a vote to be approved. Votes can either be by
majority or by consensus.</p>
<p>Action items include the following:</p>
<ul>
<li>Long Term Plans - No vote required.</li>
<li>Short Term Plans - No vote required.</li>
<li>Release Plan - Lazy majority vote on each issue, or lazy
consensus if issue involves a product change.</li>
<li>Release Testing - No vote required, once Release Plan is
approved.</li>
<li>Public Release - Majority vote, if no showstoppers are listed in
the status file.</li>
<li>Showstoppers - Lazy consensus until resolved and removed from
status file.</li>
<li>Product Changes - Lazy consensus.</li>
</ul>
</section>
<section>
<title>Long Term Plans</title>
<p>Long term plans are simply announcements that group members are
working on particular issues related to the Project. These are not
voted on, but Committers who do not agree with a particular plan, or
think that an alternative plan would be better, are obligated to
inform the group of their feelings.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Short Term Plans</title>
<p>Short term plans are announcements that a volunteer is working on a
particular set of documentation or code files with the implication
that other volunteers should avoid them or try to coordinate their
changes.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Release Plan</title>
<p>A release plan is used to keep all volunteers aware of when a
release is desired, who will be the Release Manager, when the
repository will be frozen to create a release, and other assorted
information to keep volunteers from tripping over each other. Lazy
majority decides each issue in a release plan, or lazy consensus if
the issue involves a product change.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Release Testing</title>
<p>After a new release is built, it must be tested before being
released to the public. After the release plan is approved, the
Release Manager will announce that a product is ready for testing.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Public Release</title>
<p>Once the Release Manager determines that testing is complete, and
all showstoppers for the release have been resolved, the Release
Manager shall call for a vote on the public release. Majority approval
is required before the public release can be made. The Committers who
approve a public release (vote +1) are expected to provide ongoing
support for that release while it is current. The Release Manager must
summarize the outcome of the vote before the public release becomes
final.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Showstoppers</title>
<p>Showstoppers are issues that require a fix be in place before the
next public release. They are listed in the status file in order to
focus special attention on these problems. An issue becomes a
showstopper when it is listed as such in the status file and remains
so by lazy consensus.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Product Changes</title>
<p>Changes to the products of the Project, including code and
documentation, will appear as action items in the status file. All
product changes to the currently active repository are subject to lazy
consensus.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Voting</title>
<section>
<title>Action Item Votes</title>
<p>The act of voting on an action item carries certain obligations.
Voting members are not only stating their opinion, they are also
agreeing to help do the work.</p>
<p>Any Contributor or Committer ("member") may call for an
action-item vote on the Developer mailing list. It is preferred that
a vote be preceded by a formal proposal offered for discussion
purposes. The message announcing a vote should contain a Subject
beginning with "[VOTE]", and a distinctive one-line summary
corresponding to the action item for the vote.</p>
<p>Each vote on an action item can be made in one of four
flavors:</p>
<table>
<tr>
<td>+1</td>
<td>"The action should be performed, and I will
help."</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>+0</td>
<td>"Abstain," "I support the action but I can't
help."</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>-0</td>
<td>"Abstain," "I don't support the action but I
can't help with an alternative."</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>-1</td>
<td>"The action should not be performed and I am offering an
explanation or alternative."</td>
</tr>
</table>
<p>Votes cast by the subproject's Committers are considered
"binding". When needed, at least 3 binding +1 votes are
required for action-item approval.</p>
<p>An action item may need one of two types of approval:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Consensus approval:</strong> An action requiring
consensus approval must receive at least 3 binding +1 votes and no
binding vetos.</li>
<li><strong>Majority approval:</strong> An action requiring
majority approval must receive at least 3 binding +1 votes and
more +1 votes than -1 votes.</li>
</ul>
<p>Except for a public release, all action items are considered to
have lazy approval until somebody votes -1, at which point the
action item is converted to a formal consensus or majority vote,
depending on the type of action item.</p>
<note>"Lazy" means the action item has immediate tactic
approval, and it is not necessary to tally the vote until a -1 reply
is posted. Once a -1 reply is posted, the vote must be tallied and
reported before the action item is considered approved. All
action-item votes are lazy except for a public release vote.</note>
<p>Any member may vote on any action item or related issue. When
voting on an action item, the subproject's Committers may also
include the word "binding" next to their vote, to simplify a
tally if it is needed. All binding vetos must also contain an
explanation of why the veto is appropriate.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Voting Caveats</title>
<ul>
<li>A +1 vote regarding product code can only be made binding if
the voter has tested the action on their own equipment.</li>
<li>A binding +1 vote on a public release means the
subproject's Committer agrees to provide ongoing support for
that release while it is current.</li>
<li>An abstention may have detrimental effects if too many people
abstain.</li>
<li>Vetos with no explanation are void. If you disagree with the
veto, you should lobby the person who cast the veto. Voters
intending to veto an action item should make their opinions known
to the group immediately so that the problem can be remedied as
early as possible.</li>
<li>If a Committer believes the explanation for a veto is invalid,
an affirmation of the veto can be requested. If some other
Committer does not affirm that the explanation for the veto is
valid, the veto shall be void.</li>
<li>If a dispute over a veto becomes intractable, the PMC may
consent to arbitrate the matter, and, if appropriate, rescind the
veto with a 3/4 majority vote of the PMC members.</li>
<li>Members who wish to discuss a vote before replying, may open
another thread to help avoid premature vetos. Any +/-1's or
+/-0's posted to an alternate thread, or any other thread not
labeled "[VOTE]", are considered conversational, and do
not qualify as an valid action-item vote. A "lazy item"
remains subject to lazy approval until a valid -1 reply is posted
to the "[VOTE]" thread.</li>
</ul>
</section>
<section>
<title>Vote Results</title>
<p>Most action items are subject to lazy approval, and do not
require the posting of a formal result.</p>
<p>However, any other majority item that receives any -1 reply
(later rescinded or not) must be followed by a
"[VOTE-RESULT]" message before the action item is considered
approved. Likewise, any consensus item that receives any binding
veto must post a "[VOTE-RESULT]" message summarizing the
result, and show that each veto was rescinded, before it is
considered approved. In either case, the member who requested the
vote should also post the result within 120 hours (5 days). Any
question regarding the outcome of an action-item vote may be
referred by a Committer to the PMC for arbitration.</p>
<p>A Public Release is not considered approved until the Release
Manager posts a followup message with the legend
"[VOTE-RESULT]" summarizing the replies.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Other Items</title>
<p>Proposals are not a formal action item; however, the message
offering a proposal should contain a Subject beginning with
"[PROPOSAL]". It is strongly recommended that a proposal be
circulated before calling for a formal vote. Often, once members
have had the chance to critique a proposal, an updated copy of a
proposal can be reposted as the vote document.</p>
<p>Most other messages posted to the Developer's List usually
involve either short-term or long-term plans. Often, a long-term
plan will be made in the form of a "[PROPOSAL]". If
appropriate, the proposed change or feature may then be entered to
the subproject's STATUS file or TODO list.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Voting on other matters</title>
<p>There are other matters upon which members will vote that do not
involve action items. The same general voting structure is used in
these cases, except that the "flavors" are taken to mean</p>
<table>
<tr>
<td>+1</td>
<td>"Yes," "Agree."</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>+0</td>
<td>"Abstain," "No opinion."</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>-0</td>
<td>"Abstain," "Unsure."</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>-1</td>
<td>"No," "Disagree."</td>
</tr>
</table>
</section>
</section>
<section>
<title>Branches</title>
<p>In any software development project there is a natural tension
between revolution and evolution. Many software development teams,
open or closed, have a team leader who can declare whether the code
base is in evolutionary or revolutionary mode. In a volunteer
meritocracy, this type of decision is difficult to make and impossible
to enforce. Our meritocracy is fueled by voluntary contributions, and
so we must allow everyone to contribute, and then base our final
product decisions on the contributions we actually receive.</p>
<p>Accordingly, as a matter of Apache Cocoon policy, these principles
are adopted:</p>
<ol>
<li>Every committer has the right to revolution. Anyone can
establish a branch or seperate whiteboard directory in which to
experiment with new code seperate from the main trunk. The only
responsibility a committer has when they do this is to announce
their short and long range plans, and allow others who want to help
to do so. Committers working on a revolutionary branch have the
right to develop their approach free of interference.</li>
<li>When a revolution is considered ready for prime time, the
committer(s) shall propose a merge to the developers list. At that
time, the overall community evaluates whether or not the code is
ready to become part of, or to potentially replace, the trunk.
Suggestions may be made, changes may be required. Once all issues
have been taken care of and the merge is approved, the new code may
become the trunk.</li>
<li>All development branches should be unversioned. No branch,
evolutionary or revolutionary, should have any official version
standing. This allows several parallel tracks of development to
occur with the final authority of what eventually becomes the trunk
resting with the entire community of committers.</li>
<li>The trunk is the official versioned line of the project. All
evolutionary minded people are welcome to work on it to improve it.
Evolutionary work is important and should not stop as it is always
unclear when any particular revolution will be ready for prime time
or whether it will be officially accepted.</li>
</ol>
</section>
</section>
<section>
<title>Source Repositories</title>
<p>The Project's codebase is maintained in shared information
repositories using CVS on the cvs.apache.org machine. Only Committers
have write access to these repositories. Everyone has read access via
anonymous CVS.</p>
<p>All Java Language source code in the repository must be written in
conformance to the "Code Conventions for the Java Programming
Language as published by Sun.</p>
<section>
<title>License</title>
<p>All source code committed to the Project's repositories must be
covered by the Apache License or contain a copyright and license that
allows redistribution under the same conditions as the Apache
License.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Status Files</title>
<p>Each of the Project's active source code repositories contain a
file named STATUS which is used to keep track of the agenda and plans
for work within that repository. The status file includes information
about release plans, a summary of code changes committed since the
last release, a list of proposed changes that are under discussion,
brief notes about items that individual volunteers are working on or
want discussion about, and anything else that may be useful to help
the group track progress.</p>
<p>The active status files are automatically posted to the Developer
mailing lists three times per week.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Branches</title>
<p>Groups are allowed to create a branch for release cycles, etc. They
are expected to merge completely back with the main branch as soon as
their release cycle is complete.</p>
<p>A branch is considered "evolutionary" by lazy consensus.
Upon any dispute (binding veto), a branch must be converted to
"revolutionary" status, and must be assigned a working name
that does not imply it will be the next version of the product. Once a
release plan for the branch has been approved, and the proposed
release is ready for testing, it may be assigned a version name
reflecting it is a product release candidate, and merged back with the
main branch, as appropriate to the circumstances. Any branch,
"evolutionary" or "revolutionary", shall meet the same
standard for release approval. </p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Changes</title>
<p>Simple patches to fix bugs can be committed then reviewed. With a
commit-then-review process, the Committer is trusted to have a high
degree of confidence in the change.</p>
<p>Doubtful changes, new features, and large scale overhauls need to
be discussed before committing them into the repository. Any change
that affects the semantics of an existing API function, the size of
the program, configuration data formats, or other major areas must
receive consensus approval before being committed.</p>
<p>Related changes should be committed as a group, or very closely
together. Half complete projects should never be committed to the main
branch of a development repository. All code changes must be
successfully compiled on the contributor's platform before being
committed. This includes XML code that is used to build
documentation.</p>
<p>The current source code tree for a subproject should be capable of
complete compilation at all times. However, it is sometimes impossible
for a contributor on one platform to avoid breaking some other
platform when a change is committed. If it is anticipated that a given
change will break the build on some other platform, the committer must
indicate that in the commit message.</p>
<p>A committed change must be reversed if it is vetoed by one of the
voting members and the veto conditions cannot be immediately satisfied
by the equivalent of a "bug fix" commit. The veto must be
rescinded before the change can be included in any public release.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Patches</title>
<p>When a specific change to a product is proposed for discussion or
voting on the appropriate development mailing list, it should be
presented in the form of input to the patch command. When sent to the
mailing list, the message should contain a Subject beginning with
[PATCH] and a distinctive one-line summary corresponding to the action
item for that patch.</p>
<p>The patch should be created by using the diff -u command from the
original software file(s) to the modified software file(s). For
example:</p>
<source>diff -u Main.java.orig Main.java >>
patchfile.txt</source>
<p>or</p>
<source>cvs diff -u Main.java >> patchfile.txt</source>
<p>or (Win32):</p>
<p>You can use WinCVS for a nice GUI or you can install Cygwin which
will enable you to use the bash shell and also installs a lot of other
utilities (such as diff and patch) that will turn your PC into a
virtual Unix machine.</p>
<p>All patches necessary to address an action item should be
concatenated within a single patch message. If later modification to
the patch proves necessary, the entire new patch should be posted and
not just the difference between the two patches. </p>
</section>
</section>
<section>
<title>Project Management Committee Bylaws</title>
<section>
<title>Background</title>
<p>The Apache Cocoon Project Management Committee (PMC) was formed by
the Apache Board in late 2002. The PMC is answerable to the Apache
Board with its Chair serving as primary liaison. The Apache Software
Foundation (ASF) owns the entire body of the Apache Public Licensed
code, but delegates the daily maintenance of these codebases to
individual Project Management Committees, including the Apache Cocoon
PMC. The ASF is run as a meritocracy, with decision making delegated
to the PMCs and their subproject Committers whenever possible.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Role</title>
<p>The PMC is responsible for the strategic direction and overall
success of the Apache Cocoon Project, through its subprojects and
products. Apache Cocoon is a meritocracy, and decision making is
delegated to the subproject Committers whenever possible.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Duties</title>
<p>Responsibilities of the PMC include:</p>
<ul>
<li>the active discussion of Project issues, strategic direction,
and forward progress,</li>
<li>the consideration and approval of new subprojects,</li>
<li>retiring inactive subprojects and Committers as necessary,</li>
<li>arbitrating otherwise intractable disputes regarding subproject
voting and vetos,</li>
<li>the security and reliability of the Project's Web site,
mailing lists, code repositories, and related services,</li>
<li>legal issues involving the Project and its subprojects, and</li>
<li>maintaining Project and subproject scope as chartered by the ASF
corporation</li>
</ul>
</section>
<section>
<title>Meetings</title>
<p>The PMC shall conduct as much business as possible on the Apache
Cocoon Developers mailing list. Sensitive business may also be
conducted on the closed PMC mailing list if prudent. The PMC may also
convene regular meetings with a majority of its members attending.
These meetings may take place online, via teleconference, or via other
means deemed effective by the PMC. The PMC shall post a regular status
report to General list, along with minutes of any "off-list"
meetings.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Voting</title>
<p>Only a PMC member may call for a vote of the PMC or cast a binding
vote on a PMC matter.</p>
<p>The voting pool is based on the current PMC membership. All PMC
members are expected to formally vote or abstain when a vote is
called. PMC members who continually fail to vote or otherwise
participate may lose their PMC status.</p>
<p>Most PMC actions require a "super-majority vote", where at
least 3/4's of the current PMC members must cast a positive vote
for the action to be approved. When computation of 3/4's of the
current membership does not produce a whole number, the result shall
be rounded the nearest whole number (.5 and higher rounds up).</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Chair</title>
<p>The term of the PMC Chair is one year. The election of the Chair
may take place on the Apache Cocoon Developers list or at another
meeting with a majority of PMC members in attendance. The Chair is
elected by a simple majority of PMC members. All PMC members are
expected to vote or to formally abstain. If a tie vote cannot be
otherwise resolved, there shall be a simple majority vote of the
subproject Committers on the General mailing list.</p>
<p>The Chair may resign as Chair at any time without resigning
membership to the PMC. The Chair may be re-elected to a subsequent
term. The exiting Chair retains PMC membership status.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Membership</title>
<p>There is no term limit for PMC members. The list of current PMC
members is to be maintained in the Jakarta Project Credits. All PMC
members should be active Committers to one or more Jakarta subprojects
(preferably more).</p>
<p>PMC members may resign at any time. Any member may be removed from
the PMC by a super-majority vote of the PMC members. The Chair serves
at the pleasure of the ASF Board.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>New Members</title>
<p>A subproject Committer may be nominated for the PMC by a current
PMC member. Nominees should realize that participation in the PMC
requires a regular and sustained commitment of their time, and is not
to be taken lightly. A nominee becomes a PMC member by a successful
super-majority vote.</p>
</section>
<section>
<title>Creation of subprojects</title>
<p>PMC members may propose the creation of new subprojects. Proposals
are to contain the scope of the project, identify the initial source
from which the project is to be populated, identify the mailing
list(s) if any which are to be created, and identify the initial set
of Committers. Creation of a new subproject requires approval by
super-majority vote of the PMC. It is preferred but not required that
at least one PMC member be a Committer to a new subproject.</p>
</section>
</section>
</body>
</document>
