Sorry, last message got away from me. The point of the use cases is to get a rough consensus of the kinds of things that a Sharpener will work on. Ideally, these get a) fixed / better organized and b) fleshed out with useful links, suggestions and scope of engagement statements.
So for example, if "barriers to contribution" survives, we get into what is / is not OK for a sharpener to suggest and when it is actually a problem. More concretely, consider the case where "some people" think that project Foo has an impossibly high bar for commit. How do you work out what that means? How is it impacting the community? Both "not a problem" and "yes, this is a problem" examples could be added, as well as some info on what the Sharpener is allowed to question / how deeply they should engage in tweaking internal PMC processes. Phil On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 3:08 PM Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com> wrote: > OK, I added a brain dump on the use cases. This is in the spirit of "good > ideas, bad code" ;) > > Phil > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 2:06 PM Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I just added a patch to the readme and to add me to the members list. >> Perfectly OK if the patch is rejected. I can see both sides of this. I >> just want to be very careful not to encourage too much private discussion >> and "community adjustment" happening without visibility or input of >> community members beyond the PMC. >> >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/COMDEV/issues/COMDEV-542?filter=allopenissues >> >> I will start a new md for use cases and include it in another patch. >> >> Phil >> >> On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 9:18 AM Rich Bowen <rbo...@rcbowen.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> > On Feb 12, 2024, at 10:57 AM, tison <wander4...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > >>> > Thank you for starting this discussion, Rich. >>> > >>> > I'm trying to get the points of this WG: >>> > >>> > 1. This WG is NOT a new office to "shepherd" TLPs, but to write down >>> > how any community member can help in sharpening an ASF project. >>> > 2. For applying any suggestions, the request is delegated to the >>> > Board, Trademarks, or other offices in the case; a member of this WG >>> > can be an accountable assistant. >>> > >>> >>> >>> Well … yes and no. Ideally, a Sharpener will work with the PMC, offer >>> them advice, and the PMC will act on that advice. One hopes that very >>> little, if anything, is ever actually escalated to the Board or other >>> officers. >>> >>> One of the big complaints about the Board is that it only has a big >>> hammer - that is to say, the Board doesn’t do nuance. Once something >>> reaches the Board, chances are something big is going to happen. And we >>> want to avoid that. We want to discover, and address problems, long before >>> they become problems. >>> >>> Anything that the Sharpener does, literally any member *could* do, but >>> by creating a process/structure around this, I hope to >>> >>> * Make it more acceptable to projects (ie, it’s not personal, this is >>> here to help us improve) >>> * Make it easier for members to get involved in doing this (ie, give >>> permission) >>> * Reduce the number of escalations to the Board (ie, solve problems >>> before they occur) >>> >>> >>> > So, the main work items of this WG are shaping how any community >>> > member can "supervise" an ASF project and how to collaborate with >>> > offices to get TLPs to work well. Also, "ensure" that such guidances >>> > are put into work. >>> >>> >>> I am very intentionally trying to avoid words like “supervise.” We are >>> coming alongside, and mentoring. We are not in a position of authority. The >>> very first Value I stated was that the project has a right to decline. >>> >>> > >>> > If so, I'd recall my previous comment as an Incubator mentor that: >>> > >>> >>> As a podling mentor, I know that many podlings join the ASF by >>> influences from other TLPs. So if the TLP violates our policies, it >>> increases the friction when we help the podlings to comply with our >>> policies. >>> > >>> > I already worked with trademarks@ to spot and fix issues on a few >>> > TLPs' content. I'm glad to join this WG to share my experience >>> > contributing to well-formed guidance. >>> >>> Excellent. I look forward to collaborating with you on this. >>> >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org >>> >>>
