I'm very convinced :-)  I think the Netbeans proposal is ready for a [VOTE]!

On 22 September 2016 at 13:57, Wade Chandler <cons...@wadechandler.com> wrote:
>> On Sep 22, 2016, at 08:27, Shane Curcuru <a...@shanecurcuru.org> wrote:
>> Jochen Wiedmann wrote on 9/22/16 1:43 AM:
>>> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 7:18 AM, Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> 
>>> wrote:
>>>> Still, the question remain -- for somebody like that, what would be a 
>>>> criteria
>>>> to be added as a committer after the project enters incubation?
>>> Projects decision.
>> Exactly so.  This would be a podling just like every other podling, and
>> the IPMC would expect the PPMC to start operating like an Apache
>> project.  That is, when new people come to the podling and contribute
>> work, and help the work of the podling, that after a time the PPMC will
>> discuss them, then vote them in as new committers.
>> Past merit (i.e. past contributions) is a great help to a new
>> contributor to a project, both because it's easier to get started, and
>> because the community already has a feel for how they act and can help.
>> But it in no way IMO directly leads to current merit.  Old contributors
>> normally would be voted in as committers only once they actually start
>> doing new work on the project.
> Perhaps we need to clarify what you mean by “old contributor” … Do you mean 
> those currently contributing to the imported project, those who have 
> contributed at some time in the past, but not in X days/months, or anyone not 
> on the initial committer list? If the latter, then why would this be true for 
> a current OSS project coming to ASF? If this is exactly the case, then more 
> emphasis is put on the initial committer list IMO, and that seems an 
> unnecessary distraction, and an artificial limit, but if it must be that way 
> it must, and if not, then great, but please clarify.
> I ask this because I recently contributed some things for Groovy support, and 
> intend to work quite a bit on those features. I have contributed quite a bit 
> to the form (UI editor), J2EE, and Java SE modules in the past. I don’t want 
> to suddenly be hindered just because the project moves to the ASF where I 
> have to “start over”; I have invested quite a number of years into NetBeans 
> and it’s community.
>> On Sep 22, 2016, at 07:00, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Agree - but the initial committer list is also an opportunity to show
>> you really mean open development, and that it's not just business as
>> usual with Friends & Family on the list.
> Understood, but the impression still has to be on the community all the rules 
> of merit apply regardless of perception. I have faith Gj and many I know on 
> that initial list will make sure anyone who has made solid code contributions 
> to NB, who also want to contribute in the ASF, will be fast tracked per prior 
> NB community decisions. We are operating off this assumption now; community 
> and Oracle included per my understanding.
>> One of the freedoms a project gains from moving to ASF is (somewhat)
>> relief from institutional political considerations.  A new intern at a
>> company would no longer just be given carte blance write access
>> without first engaging with the whole community and earning merit
>> through contributions. Of course each community decides how high or
>> low the bar should be to earn committership - but the bar should be
>> the same for anyone.
> I 100% agree with this. I think it is definitely that the rules have to apply 
> to everyone equally including employees of a company including the donor. I 
> don’t imagine someone who falls outside categories of merit in the current NB 
> process now should suddenly be committers at ASF. Committers should be 
> committers. Those who were well on their way to earn committer status should 
> be considered, and it should be rare they are not promoted. Those not 
> committing code or submitting patches now, should start from the premise they 
> have to earn committer rights, and the project should enforce that as a 
> minimum; merit isn’t about free trophies or we’d all have doctorates or be in 
> the NFL or NBA :-D
>> I found for several podlings that people (myself included) who were
>> perhaps dormant "contributors" before the Incubator 'woke up' after
>> being added as an equal peer on the initial list. The beginning of a
>> podling; while sometimes struggling a bit with bootstrapping, is also
>> a chance for a project to review many of its practices and to build
>> common ownership - reduce the "us and them" feeling.
> Sure; IMHO a sane committer of old should be a sane committer of new; if they 
> want to be involved. My understanding in the current NB processes that is 
> true now. Certainly in an OSS world people come and work as they can, and 
> sometimes they can do more than other times. Sometimes they necessarily have 
> to become dormant; children, jobs, friends, life… In the NB community we 
> understand this and respect it; a work life balance.
>> I think Netbeans has the balance somewhat right - but I would hope
>> there would be more engagement on their existing lists to more openly
>> invite anyone who wants to join; or at least make it clear that the
>> whole of the community (read: mailing list) gets to influence project
>> decisions.
> Yes, everyone on the lists “influences” the project now, but not everyone on 
> the mailing list gets “committer” rights or the same influence; even in 
> Apache projects that I have seen. We have a merit based process for that now. 
> In the ASF us non-Oracle employee committers should then gain a higher level 
> of influence as it becomes community driven versus single entity driven; we 
> certainly have to step up though! … like Spiderman’s Uncle Ben said … great 
> power; great responsibility.
> My assumption or expectation perhaps is roughly (and I imagine it will be 
> close) 1) if you were a committer to NB, per its already existing rules, then 
> you are in 2) if you were already submitting patches to “show you know what 
> you are doing” per the current rules, then you are in 3) if you were not an 
> active contributor, then you have to step up and show merit. This essentially 
> models the current NB process, and per my involvement with different Apache 
> projects over the years, is roughly like a lot of them.
> Thanks,
> Wade
> ===================
> Wade Chandler
> e: cons...@wadechandler.com
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Stian Soiland-Reyes

To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Reply via email to