On Sep 29, 2011, at 1:15 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > I don't believe there is anything in the information provided to new > committers that they should do such a thing.
I think it was discussed, but then it wasn't mentioned in your docs. I think It would be good to start suggesting it... Regards, Dave > > - Dennis > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] > Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2011 12:50 > To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: How do we want to announce new Committers/PPMC members > > > On Sep 29, 2011, at 12:14 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > >> +1 >> >> but with reference to the list that indicates a committer who >> has been authorized for this project. That is the one Christian >> provided, >> <http://people.apache.org/committers-by-project.html#ooo>. > > I have added this link the podling's people.mdtext page. > > Updating people.mdtext is considered to be a first step for a new committer, > but clearly not everyone has cared to do that update. > > One advantage of doing so is that it provides each committer experience in > using the Apache CMS. > > >> >> This list is useful to verify that committers are established and >> authorized in the system to be a committer for ooo. >> >> The entries in bold identify some who might (also) be >> mentors/ASF Members. > > Bold identifies ASF members. Not every member listed is a Mentor. I think > though you have to be a Member to be a Mentor although I could be wrong about > that. > > Regards, > Dave > >> >> - Dennis >> >> PS: This index finds all committers and what projects they are authorized >> to commit on: <http://people.apache.org/committer-index.html>. >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Donald Whytock [mailto:dwhyt...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2011 10:58 >> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org >> Subject: Re: How do we want to announce new Committers/PPMC members >> >> Looking at the AOO "people" page >> (http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/people.html) I see "some of >> our contributors". Is this a list of committers? If so, perhaps new >> committers can be announced along the lines of, "The OpenOffice list >> of Committers at <URL> has updated with the addition of <name>." Less >> laudatory, more PSA. >> >> If that list on the site isn't of committers, should it be? Or should >> there be one, with "other contributors" mentioned? >> >> Don >> >> On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote: >>> A recent press article suggested that this project had not had any new >>> committers since the project started. This is false. But it would be >>> hard to tell that, looking at our mailing list or website. >>> >>> So far we've been quiet about new committers. We have the votes, >>> process the paper work, etc., on the ooo-private list. >>> >>> Some Apache projects announce each new committer to their main mailing >>> list. Others don't. We're received mixed advice from our mentors. >>> >>> IMHO, we want to avoid two errors, at the extremes: >>> >>> 1) A public announcement note for new committers that is read as being >>> too congratulatory, one that makes those who are not committers (or >>> not yet committers) feel less appreciated. >>> >>> 2) Total lack of any acknowledgement of new committers/PPMC that leads >>> observers to believe that new committers are chosen in a secret >>> ceremony involving ceremonial robes, oaths, and animal sacrifices. >>> >>> An announcement of a new committer should not be surprising. It >>> should confirm what any regular observer of the mailing list already >>> knows, namely that person X is actively involved in the project and is >>> making high quality contributions. So on one hand, acknowledging a new >>> committer should not tell you anything that you don't already know. >>> >>> On the other hand, there is reinforcement value to stating what we >>> know, especially for newer members of the project, i.e., the project's >>> future committers. >>> >>> By analogy, I've worked in situations where job promotions were given >>> secretly, and people were shy to ever speak of them. It suggested >>> that the company could not bear the scrutiny of seeing the inequity of >>> hoiw promotions were given out. And I've worked places where >>> promotions were announced widely, with a summary of the person's >>> recent contributions, reinforcing to the entire team the kinds of >>> contributions that could get them -- some day -- a similar promotion. >>> >>> If we believe that we're doing a good job at selecting new committers >>> then we should want this to be known. Transparency shows the fairness >>> of the process. >>> >>> Obviously the context here at Apache is not the same. But I think the >>> choices are analogous. >>> >>> Personally, I'm in favor of a modest announcement to the ooo-dev list >>> after a new committer has been elected and have submitted the iCLA. >>> >>> What do you think? >>> >>> -Rob >>> >> >
