+1 for Committer == PPMC approach, since it does bring diversities from
different perspectives.

Best,
Hao

On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 6:10 PM, Ma, Junjie <[email protected]> wrote:

> I agree this will encourage involvement and ensure vitality, and vote for
> Committer == PMC.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Colin Ma(Ma Jun Jie)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gregory Chanan [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 9, 2015 4:07 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Committer == PPMC for Sentry?
>
> I think at the current time the benefit of growing the community by adding
> to the PMC outweighs the risk of adding PMC members who may only be "ready"
> for committership.  So I'd vote for Committer == PMC.  If that calculation
> changes in the future, we can revisit.
>
> Greg
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Sravya Tirukkovalur <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Yes, I agree that Sentry has been mostly operating with decisions
> > being made on dev list ( PPMC + Committer + contributors).
> >
> > I looked at various other projects, and was trying to look at why
> > Committer = PPMC makes sense in some settings and not in some. Seems
> > like Committer = PPMC makes sense during incubation as it would drive
> > more folks thinking of building the community which is super important
> > given the small time in incubation. Not saying non PPMC do not work on
> > building the community but it just gives extra push by giving rights
> > on electing committers. Given that, I would like to see Committer ==
> > PPMC in Sentry. One thing we might consider is: All committers who
> > have contributed (code and non code) after entering graduation?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 9:03 PM, Anne Yu <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > After investigation, it seems for some existing projects we do see
> > > Committer == PPMC, and it is up to project community's decision. For
> > > example here states, "In many projects committers are also invited
> > > to be part of the core group within the project that ensures the
> > > project's vitality (represented by the Project Management Committee,
> > > PMC). In a few projects a only a subset of committers, who have
> > > earned even more merit, are invited to be a part of the PMC. "
> > >
> > > It appears sentry is contributing voluntarily by a smaller size of
> > > active committers, to encourage involvement and ensure vitality, we
> > > can start to consider this Committer == PPMC approach.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Anne
> > >
> > > On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 12:54 AM, Lenni Kuff <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > > This is breaking off a separate discussion for the thread Sravya
> > started
> > > > [1].  Specifically, the part around whether Sentry should move
> > > > from a
> > > model
> > > > where Committer != PPMC to a model where Committer == PPMC.
> > > >
> > > > Background:
> > > > It's been two years since the Sentry project entered incubation
> > > > and
> > over
> > > > that time we have welcomed many new community members, as
> > > > committers and contributors. However, we have not added any new
> > > > PPMC members over
> > > the
> > > > same time period. This is concerning because building a successful
> > > > community means growing committers as well as growing the PPMC.
> > > > At the same time, we have strived to be a very open community, and
> > > involve
> > > > everyone (not just PPMC members) in project decisions.  As Arvind
> > > mentioned
> > > > [2], there have been few instances, outside of committership/board
> > > reports,
> > > > where the PPMC made decisions outside of the dev list.
> > > >
> > > > Given that we have a) in some ways implicitly been acting in a
> > Committer
> > > ==
> > > > PPMC model already and b) have many new folks in the community
> > > > from
> > when
> > > > the project started, I think we should revisit this topic.
> > > >
> > > > I want to hear everyone's thoughts on whether you think we should
> > > > go
> > with
> > > > Committer == PPMC model for Sentry? Logistically, this would mean
> > > > all existing committers would become PPMC members and there would
> > > > be no distinction between committer and PPMC member moving forward.
> > > >
> > > > Feel free to also chime in if you disagree with my assessment above.
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/sentry-dev/201511.mbox/%3CCAC
> > MN7iwY1FXCN6iGTJAN28MC4v%3DFUpKAzvdqVRNq9%3DK7YcomtQ%40mail.gmail.com%
> > 3E
> > > >
> > > > [2]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/sentry-dev/201511.mbox/%3CCAH
> > UddLMOeq7q4XFpy6VcCcmetUjt5iazf1fNmXv15EXJrypTWg%40mail.gmail.com%3E
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Lenni
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Thanks,
> > > Anne
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sravya Tirukkovalur
> >
>

Reply via email to