On Jul 23, 2011, at 7:27 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 1:45 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Let me ask the question in reverse: how long do you think that we should 
>> leave the door open, no questions asked?  Why?
>> 
> 
> I was thinking September 15th.

+1 - That's about 3 months since the start.

Regards,
Dave


>  If we have not heard at all from
> someone it may be an indication that they are traveling, on holiday,
> and don't have access to email.  August is a big vacation month.  So
> I'd wait for that to pass.
> 
> We should also consider the possibility that someone is not responding
> for other reasons than vacations.  Maybe we have the wrong email
> address?  Or they are confused by our notes due to language
> differences?
> 
>> Remember, Initial Committers are grandfathered in as committers and members 
>> of the PPMC without being here and demonstrating commitment through their 
>> contributions.  It is not even a matter of them being voted in based on 
>> existing reputation.  (I'm one of those myself.)
>> 
> 
> Commitment starts with showing up.  I don't have problems with
> withdrawing a committer invitation of someone who never shows up,
> provided we have given them ample opportunity.
> 
>> At some point, one wants to be complete with intake of initial committers 
>> and working toward a full-fledged meritocracy instead. I suspect it is 
>> possible that the PPMC will also shrink if those who are already on it do 
>> not eventually demonstrate a commitment that would have qualified them in 
>> the ordinary way.
>> 
> 
> I'd do that on an entirely different timescale.  We have committers
> with a range of skills and interests, and some of these will require a
> full product cycle to show themselves.  For example, a UI designer
> will be more active at the design stage, a QA person once we have a
> build, a coder once we have source code, etc.
> 
>> At what point does holding out that special status to those who have not 
>> shown up become a point too far.  In this case, we are talking about folks 
>> who have not submitted an iCLA and not responded to requests to submit them 
>> and, as far as I know, have not appeared on ooo-dev.  Even if we withdraw 
>> the Initial Committer invitations at some point, there is no barrier to 
>> becoming a contributor and demonstrating commitment to the project.  It's 
>> not fatal.
>> 
> 
> Right.
> 
>> I propose to ask each of these absent Initial Committers whether they intend 
>> to submit an iCLA and how much time they want to do that.  It is a simple 
>> request.  There are any number of possible responses.  I assume we will deal 
>> with the responses on an individual basis.  If they do not intend to submit 
>> an iCLA, it would be useful to know, so we don't have to be expecting them, 
>> watching for the iCLA to arrive, etc.
>> 
> 
> Good idea.  Another source of delay, in addition to vacations, is
> corporate legal review, for those who need to go through it. For
> contributors who jobs are transitioning, this may have additional
> complexities.  I think we should be flexible in such cases.
> 
>> My goal is having them show up.  And if they are not going to show up, I 
>> would like to know that.  Then we can tell when we have a full roster of 
>> Initial Committers that are ready and willing as they signaled they were.
>> 
>>  - Dennis
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Wolf Halton [mailto:[email protected]]
>> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 20:32
>> To: [email protected]; [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: RE: [DISCUSS] <Initial Committer>: Apache OpenOffice.org 
>> Initial Committer Status
>> 
>> What is the technical or social stressor causing this issue to be framed in
>> this time-sensitive language?
>> Wolf
>> 
>> On Jul 22, 2011 4:40 PM, "Dennis E. Hamilton" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>> I did not include a time limit, because we had not agreed on one. Instead,
>> I made the request to indicate whether they intended to submit an iCLA and
>> how much time they would need (for whatever review reasons or other
>> determinations involved).
>>> 
>>> These Initial Committers were already sent a bulk e-mail on June 23.
>>> 
>>> Why would we not expect the Initial Committers who signed up by June 10 to
>> report whether they intend to actually become committers? It is about their
>> commitment, it seems to me. And they always have the opportunity to become
>> committers by showing up and contributing, the same as for anyone who is not
>> an Initial Committer.
>>> 
>>> My thought was to wait 15-30 days after we approach all of them
>> individually and then send a follow-up to ones who have not responded at all
>> indicating that the invitation to become committers and PPMC members is
>> being withdrawn. (Assuming we decide to do that and set such a date.)
>>> 
>>> I would make the changes that Stephen Bergmann recommended.
>>> 
>>> More feedback and discussion, please.
>>> 
>>> - Dennis
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Juan C. Sanz [mailto:[email protected]]
>>> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 12:28
>>> To: [email protected]
>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] <Initial Committer>: Apache OpenOffice.org Initial
>> Committer Status
>>> 
>>> El 22/07/2011 5:10, Dennis E. Hamilton escribió:
>>>> There are 20 Initial Committers on the OpenOffice.org incubator proposal
>> who have not yet submitted iCLAs or informed us of their intention not to do
>> so.
>>>> 
>>>> Today I used the following format for a message to one of those Initial
>> Committers.
>>>> 
>>>> Before 19 more of these are sent out I wanted to check how understandable
>> this is.
>>>> 
>>>> I am particularly concerned for how clear this is for those who are not
>> native English speakers.
>>>> 
>>>> I welcome your advice.
>>>> 
>>>> - Dennis
>>>> 
>>>> *** specimen message ***
>>>> 
>>>> From:<PPMC member>
>>>> Sent:<today>
>>>> To:<Initial Committer lacking iCLA so far>
>>>> Cc: [email protected]
>>>> Subject:<Initial Committer Name>: Apache OpenOffice.org Initial Committer
>> Status
>>>> 
>>>> Hello<Initial Committer Name>,
>>>> 
>>>> You are listed as an Initial Committer on the proposal for the Apache
>> OpenOffice.org incubator project.
>>>> 
>>>> The incubator project was accepted by Apache on 2011-06-13.
>>>> 
>>>> As an Initial Committer you are invited to be established as a committer
>> on the Apache OpenOffice.org incubator podling. You are also invited to
>> serve on the Podling Project Management Committee after you are established
>> as a committer.
>>>> 
>>>> The prerequisite to becoming established as a committer is to register an
>> iCLA agreement with Apache.
>>>> 
>>>> Our records indicate that no iCLA has been received from you.
>>>> 
>>>> If you do not choose to submit an iCLA, please report your decision to<
>> [email protected]>. We will then know not wait for it.
>>>> 
>>>> If you are submitting an iCLA, please report your decision to
>> [email protected] and indicate how much time you need before
>> the iCLA will be sent to Apache.
>>>> 
>>>> For more information and iCLA/CCLA forms, go to<
>> http://www.apache.org/licenses/#clas>. Complete instructions for submission
>> of an iCLA is at the top of the form (text or PDF).
>>>> 
>>>> We welcome your contribution to the Apache OpenOffice.org incubator
>> project.
>>>> 
>>>> - the Apache OpenOffice.org incubator Podling Project Management
>> Committee (PPMC)
>>>> 
>>>> *** end of specimen message ***
>>>> 
>>> I think it's understundandable. But, what is the next step? how long do
>>> we wait for the user id?
>>> Regards.
>>> Juan C. Sanz
>>> 
>> 
>> 

Reply via email to