Thanks everyone. It seems like this has generally positive support so I will start a VOTE thread around making this official.
Thanks, Lenni On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 7:11 PM, Sun, Dapeng <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 for "Committer == PPMC". > Many successful incubator projects treat "Committer == PPMC" during > incubation period. Committers already have some experience on project. > Promoting Committer to PPMC during incubation period will make more people > join more deep discussions. > > Regards > Dapeng > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hao Hao [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, December 11, 2015 10:18 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Committer == PPMC for Sentry? > > +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/%3CC > > > AC > > > MN7iwY1FXCN6iGTJAN28MC4v%3DFUpKAzvdqVRNq9%3DK7YcomtQ%40mail.gmail.co > > > m% > > > 3E > > > > > > > > > > [2] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/sentry-dev/201511.mbox/%3CC > > > AH > > > UddLMOeq7q4XFpy6VcCcmetUjt5iazf1fNmXv15EXJrypTWg%40mail.gmail.com%3E > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Lenni > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Thanks, > > > > Anne > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Sravya Tirukkovalur > > > > > >
