Thank you for the clarification.
-----Original Message-----
From: Marko Rodriguez [mailto:okramma...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 09:34
To: general@incubator.apache.org; dennis.hamil...@acm.org
Subject: Re: [Proposal] TinkerPop: A Graph Computing Framework
Hello,
Here is how TinkerPop current runs it "TinkerPop-Contributors."
1. If you are a vendor, you get one engineer from your organization to
be on TinkerPop-Contributors who speaks on behalf of your organization/product.
(~15 people)
- e.g. "That API addition will be extremely expensive for us to
implement." "Can we get the next release out within the next month because we
are about to release our product and want the latest features?", etc.
2. If you are working on core TinkerPop day-in and day-out you are part
of TinkerPop-Contributors. (~3 people)
- e.g. On the Google Hangouts, nit-picky about documentation,
committing code and maintaining your code…the people who baby the source.
3. If you have worked on TinkerPop core at some point. (~5 people)
- e.g. You were hot and heavy on the codebase for a month+
straight but then lost interest but still want to hang around. Perhaps it looks
good on the resume why you don't want to leave… who knows?
Most people are in group 1 or 3. I was told by our champion (David Nalley) that
you can't have people be on the board because of who they work for. Thus, the
concept of "one engineer per company" is not acceptable. Next, I don't think it
is smart to just have everyone in group 3 mapped over. I think its best to
start with the minimum requirement of people and grow from that core. Who are
these three people?
Marko -- has been coding on TinkerPop "day in and day out" for the last
5 years.
Stephen -- has been coding on TinkerPop "day in and day out" for the
last 3 years.
James -- has been an evangelist for TinkerPop for the last 5 years and
is getting the TinkerPop book effort underway.
These are the most "hardcore" members of TinkerPop. Now, once (and if)
TinkerPop goes Apache, I'm sure more engineers (either currently in
"TinkerPop-Contributors" or new to the scene) will want to make concerted
efforts to be apart of TinkerPop. Through the years I have become too painfully
aware of "commit and split"-contributors ("here is a big ball of features,
merge it…oh, I can't work on that anymore, my boss doesn't care about graphs
anymore. good luck maintaing that code." --- many group 3 people are in this
camp). Once we realize someone is here "for the long haul" and truly cares
about the project, we are happy to have them join.
"Lets start small and grow" is the philosophy behind the 3 initial committers.
Cool?
Thank you,
Marko.
http://markorodriguez.com
On Dec 25, 2014, at 3:12 PM, "Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamil...@acm.org>
wrote:
> -- with reply below --
> From: Marvin Humphrey [mailto:mar...@rectangular.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 25, 2014 13:39
> To: general@incubator.apache.org; Dennis Hamilton
> Subject: Re: [Proposal] TinkerPop: A Graph Computing Framework
>
> On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
> <dennis.hamil...@acm.org> wrote:
>> I am puzzled by the TinkerPop proposal identifying 3 initial committers and
>> yet there is this long list of affiliated folks.
>>
>> What is that separate list intended to signify if none of them are worthy to
>> be initial committers?
>
> If it's like other projects, I speculate that the people on that longer list
> have exhibited varying levels of activity over time. I don't think it's a bad
> thing if the initial committer list is only a subset (though 3 is arguably too
> small even to start). So long as the podling busies itself with the task of
> voting new people in, it should be OK. I think the way Marko put it bodes
> well:
>
> Thus, typically finding those people is the difficult part, not the
> accepting of those who do so.
>
> <orcmid>
> That list is noise, then, especially with no accompanying explanation of
> how it supports the proposal.
>
> With regard to finding committers, I notice that folks request
> being added to the initial committers list of a proposal and
> those are vetted one way or another by the proposer/champion.
> Has the proposal been publicized to that group and any
> interest in being initial committers (and especially filing
> Apache iCLAs) elicited?
> </orcmid>
>
> Marvin Humphrey
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
