On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 10:05 AM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 4, 2015, at 11:32 AM, Joe Brockmeier <j...@zonker.net> wrote: > > * I would invite folks with access to go to Sentry's private list and > look over discussions about adding new contributors, and discussions > about the project in general. > > > I took a look. > > From a community growth perspective, I see them adding new committers, > which is a good thing. What I don’t see is any discussion at all about > adding PPMC members, nor any discussion about why they chose to go the > Committer != PPMC route. > > In a thread related to the first new committer being added [1], it is > pointed out that the podling website stated that Sentry was Committer == > PMC, but that the new member vote was only for Committer. At that point it > looks like the website was updated to reflect Committer != PMC. From that > point on, all new member votes were for Committer only, and there were no > discussions regarding adding new PMC members or promoting committers to the > PMC role. > > What I find slightly disconcerting is that there doesn’t seem to be any > consideration or discussion around growing the PPMC and why that’s > important. Sure they have 20-odd PPMC members from the initial committers > list, so it would take a pretty large exodus to render the project unable > to function, but I don’t see anything to indicate that they understand the > function and importance of growing the PPMC. > > Anyone from the community that can pitch in with more details? I realize the firehose that is the IPMC can be overwhelming, and often intimidating, but you should feel free to ensure the record is accurately reflected. :-) Patrick > If I’ve misinterpreted anything, please feel free to correct me. > > -Taylor > > [1] > https://mail-search.apache.org/members/private-arch/sentry-private/201402.mbox/%3cCAHUddLNXceMb0xnk=1GEb6tVmCshYQMFe=zcpplgfcwgg+f...@mail.gmail.com%3e >
