My feeling is similar to Tim's: It's the PPMC's responsibility, but a contributor is welcome to plead their case, ask for a mentor, and so on. I think we shouldn't consider it rude or pushy or aggressive to request committership. It is a compliment to Impala and the Impala community that the contributor want to be more involved.
What do you think, Michael? On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 8:36 AM, Tim Armstrong <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Michael, > My two cents is that the PMC should be proactive about identifying > potential committers and working with them to address any gaps. We haven't > done a good job of that so far but we've started up some discussions on the > private list to get better at that. > > You should feel free to ask anyone on the PMC about any of the above > questions. Ideally that wouldn't be necessary, but in practice it may help > move things along, particularly if you have someone who will advocate for > you and wrangle the PMC to come to a consensus. It's definitely on us to > communicate to you what gaps (if any) there are - it shouldn't really be a > black box. > > - Tim > > On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 8:24 AM, Michael Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > >> You've done a great job highlighting some example scenarios. Here are some >> questions that aren't addressed in your writeup. >> >> What are contributors' responsibilities to move toward committership? In >> particular, I'm talking about process, not the nuts and bolts of >> contributions (including patches, bugs, reviews). For example: >> >> Should a contributor who wants to be a committer find a "mentor"? >> >> Should a contributor who wants to be a committer be lobbying for >> committership to someone who has reviewed his patches, or dealt with bugs >> he's filed, or otherwise interacted with? >> >> Should a contributor nominate himself on this list? Must he cite examples >> of his contributions? >> >> How can a contributor who wants to be a committer receive good feedback for >> areas of improvement if his committership is rejected? >> >> >> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 1:41 PM, Jim Apple <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > I think it would be helpful to non-committer contributors (and non-PMC >> > committers (just me right now)) if PPMC members would muse a bit about >> > what they believe the bar is for committership or PPMC membership. >> > >> > I am not suggesting that the PPMC write a document with so much detail >> > that you are hamstrung when looking at contributors in the future and >> > decising if they did 6 hard code reviews and 5 medium or 7 hard code >> > reviews and 4 medium ones. >> > >> > However, multiple people have pinged me asking how to become a >> > committer, asking what work products are sufficient. >> > >> > I don't have a foolproof way of describing the possible bars, so let >> > me give a few examples for feedback from the PPMC. >> > >> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> > Potential committers: >> > >> > Alice started contributing 4 months ago. She fixes at least one style >> > issue or typo every weekend. >> > >> > Bob started contributing a year ago. We uses Impala to organize his >> > VHS collection, and he regularly reports scaling bugs as his >> > collection grows to more and more impalad nodes. His reports are often >> > out of date, since he runs an old Impala, but some are still bugs in >> > the latest version. His bug reports are of very high quality. >> > >> > Carol started contributing six months ago. She helped design one >> > tricky feature. It took her six months and 27 revisions to get the >> > patch in. She also helps other users a lot with their issues. >> > >> > Dave has been contributing for 18 months. He helped design a tricky >> > feature, too, but his code was not high quality enough to check in. He >> > did document the feature while a PPMC member wrote the code. Since >> > then, he's been helping users on the mailing lists and filing UI bugs, >> > especially with the REPL. >> > >> > Eve used to contribute before Impala was with Apache, and she was not >> > listed as a committer/PPMC member when incubation started. Since then, >> > she does code reviews, only commenting on style issues. She does 3 or >> > 4 a month. >> > >> > Frank has been contributing for three months. He writes 3-4 patches >> > every weekend. They are all tests, query generation, or >> > impala-shell.sh work, and they are almost uniformly high-quality. >> > >> > My personal feelings: Yes on Bob, Carol, Eve, and Frank. Alice is not >> > on track. Dave is on track but should do more design work and doc >> > writing. >> > >> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> > Potential PPMC members, all of which are already committers. >> > >> > Gertrude has been a contributor for 18 months. She spends most of her >> > efforts on backend performance in-the-small - a few microops saved per >> > row per patch. She helps review patches in this area. She doesn't >> > participate much on governance. >> > >> > Harold has been a contributor for a 30 months. He works exclusively on >> > performance, but he writes very little code. All of his effort is >> > devoted to understanding Impala performance issues, which he writes >> > and and files as high quality bug reports. He does not review code and >> > he does not write code or documentation. He participates in discussion >> > and consensus-building on design. >> > >> > Imelda has been a contributor for 12 months. She also does not write >> > code. She is focused only on community outreach, writing blog posts >> > and doing the simplest code reviews for her recruits to the project. >> > She posts or gets a new contributor once a month. >> > >> > Jules has been a contributor for 40 months. He only reviews code, but >> > he gives outstanding reviews of both design and style. He managed two >> > releases last year. >> > >> > Kim has been a contributor for 55 months. She used to write a lot of >> > code but now she is focused on keeping infrastructure ship-shape, >> > mainly flaky test fixing and Jenkins wrangling. She rarely votes. >> > >> > My personal feelings: No on Gertrude and Kim, yes on Harold, Imelda, >> > and Jules. G+K may be outstanding committers and members, but are not >> > on track for PPMC membership. However, they could get on track very >> > easily by focusing some small part of their effort on governance work. >> > >> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> > >> > BTW, if you don't know if you already are a PPMC member, here is the >> list: >> > >> > http://incubator.apache.org/projects/impala.html >> > >> > If you are a PPMC member, please subscribe to private@, where votes on >> > committership and PPMC membership will be held. >> > >> > This general discussion should happen in public; private is for >> > discussion of real people, not these fake names. >> > >>
