For pootle, it is possible for there to be anonymous submissions. That is not acceptable for AOO.
If there's a way of registering on pootle, just as for bugzilla and wiki, etc., then identified people could register and submit changes for pootle. But it might be necessary for a committer to apply those contributions. That would then be another case where a regular and reliable contributor to pootle might be invited to be a committer. Although there is only one kind of committer, committers are trusted to not make changes in areas where they are not expert enough. Many committers make contributions for review before commitment in areas where they are not (yet) expert. I think a simple test is whether or not a regular contributor is often making requests for committers to review something and commit it and the committers see that the contributions are reliable. This might not apply in every case. I think it is important to account for how it applies when considering the eligibility of a contributor to becoming a committer. I don't think the criteria change because there is a perceived shortage of (active) committers. - Dennis -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Yong Lin Ma Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 21:59 To: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Rules of voting for new committers and PPMC members I agree with you except I don't undertand the pootle part. I did read it quite a few times... Share something in CC (something similar as SVN). source files are managed in different groupes. Like source code, testing script, id files. People only apply for rights they need. The committer rights here carry a lot. It would be very helpful if someone can list it out. For example: Update source code (including id files, testing script, build script..) Update website Can confirm a bug in BZ Can edit bugs in BZ anything else? I also understand why it ends up in this way. I think it is nature for Apache projects before. Bug AOO is too big and needs much more contributors than other projects. We also trust committers who have no idea how the AOO codes works won't mess things up because they would never bother to change the code. On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 11:06 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton <[email protected]> wrote: > I only know the principle by example. > > I think some of the web pages about contributors and what having someone > become a committer illustrate this. For example, the common case is where a > productive contributor can stop submitting patches for others to review and > commit by being invited to be a committer and now able to contribute to the > code base directly. > > Contributing bug reports or contributing on a wiki does not require so much. > But processing bug reports and administering the wiki would, since it would > then not be necessary to request that others do it. > > If there is a way to register for pootle to submit translation materials, but > not directly incorporate the material, that would be a place where committer > karma would be valuable in support of regular contributors. > > Those are the cases that occur to me. > > - Dennis > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Yong Lin Ma > Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 19:18 > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Rules of voting for new committers and PPMC members > > On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 2:08 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton > <[email protected]> wrote: >> I just realized that there is a principle around the election of committers >> that may have been lost sight of. >> > > Where can I find the principle in detail? > >> Here is something to consider: >> >> The classical case for someone becoming a committer is that they can >> more-easily do something they are already doing. The usual example: instead >> of submitting patches that have to be reviewed and committed by someone >> else, a committer is empowered to apply patches directly to the SVN. >> > > Becoming a committer also means more responsibility and more self-government. > Just to developer, if you already get committer rights, I urge you to > get your work reviewed by someone else if possible before getting it > into SVN. > > >> The Apache OpenOffice project also has need for committers in conjunction >> with governance responsibilities (such as oversight of the Community Forums) >> or infrastructure work (e.g., administering the MediaWiki server) and being >> on the PMC for supporting confidential matters (including ooo-security) and >> having accountability for oversight. >> >> In looking at someone whose contributions are clear, the next question is, I >> think, where do they fit in the above picture? If being a committer (or a >> PPMC member) is inessential to the work being done, it seems inappropriate >> to confer committer privileges. I think neither PPMC (next: PMC) membership >> nor committer status should be viewed as ceremonial achievements. >> >> - Dennis >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Yong Lin Ma >> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 22:50 >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Rules of voting for new committers and PPMC members >> >> A specific question. What is the criteria for a QE member to become a >> committer? >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 4:50 AM, Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On Jun 4, 2012, at 12:21 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Jun 4, 2012, at 1:34 AM, Rob Weir wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 9:28 PM, Dave Fisher <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jun 3, 2012, at 5:18 PM, Kay Schenk <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 06/03/2012 11:48 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: >>>>>>>>> FWIW, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The Foundation Roles are explained here: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#roles >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> yes, this is standard ASF policy. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> My question/concern at this point would be -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> how well do we think this works for Apache OpenOffice? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The PPMC has had the practice of making Committers into PPMC members on >>>>> the same VOTE. This is the practice for some Apache projects, but not all. >>>>> I think that from now on this project should always have separate votes as >>>>> a matter of policy. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What do others think? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> If we agree that committer and PMC are different roles with different >>>>>> criteria, then I think that is the natural outcome. >>>>>> >>>>>> But it will depend on the individual. Consider three types of >>>>> contributors: >>>>>> >>>>>> -- experienced OpenOffice.org contributor, but new to Apache >>>>>> >>>>>> -- new to the project entirely, but experienced with Apache from >>>>>> another Apache project, perhaps already a PMC member in another >>>>>> project >>>>>> >>>>>> - new both to OpenOffice and to Apache >>>>>> >>>>>> Based on prior experience it might be easier/faster to demonstrate the >>>>>> necessary skills these roles. In the first category, the experienced >>>>>> OOo contributor, I'd expect they could be make a committer quickly, >>>>>> but will take time to learn about The Apache Way. But in the other >>>>>> categories they might already have that knowledge (in the 2nd case), >>>>>> or develop it concurrently as they learn about the code over a longer >>>>>> period of time, >>>>>> >>>>>> But in principle I think we should be distinguishing this roles. >>>>> >>>>> Let's discuss (2) since now that the project is bootstrapped those in >>>>> category (1) will be quickly recognized and (3) is the usual case. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Well I do have a concern about (1). In fact, given the ecosystem here, with >>>> the amount of "paths" one might take to participate, I wonder if we miss >>>> participation in some arenas. >>> >>> We certainly will. >>> >>>> >>>> I guess the only thing we can hope for in this respect is that a current >>>> PPMC member (or two) has their fingers in several areas. >>> >>> It is important for all committers and PMC members to identify and >>> encourage contributors. The PMC should keep a "watch" list of contributors >>> who look likely. Committers can send suggestions to ooo-private along with >>> the areas of contribution and interested PMC members can look for sustained >>> effort. >>> >>>> >>>> A discussion for another time perhaps. >>> >>> Yes. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Dave >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Consider >>>>> (a) Committers on another project. >>>>> (b) PMC members on another project. >>>>> >>>>> None of these people expect to automatically be granted roles on another >>>>> Apache project. They expect that they will earn merit, but like the prior >>>>> OpenOffice.org, experience will show. This is why it can be a good idea >>>>> for >>>>> a project to add experienced Apache committers / PMC members to the >>>>> "Initial Committer" list. >>>>> >>>>> On Jun 3, 2012, at 7:30 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> ... >>>>>> If there were a way to make people members of the >>>>>> (P)PMC without making them committers I am sure that >>>>>> would be used a lot but it would seem meritocratically >>>>>> incorrect to bring into the PPMC people that are not >>>>>> committers but not offer the same opportunity to >>>>>> committers by default. >>>>> >>>>> Keep it simple. So Committer first and then (P)PMC. Think of concentric >>>>> circles with code being on one sector, but with many other sectors that >>>>> differ from project to project. >>>>> >>>> >>>> definitely +1 on this. >>>> >>>> Committers first... >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> If the (P)PMC decides someone needs to be both then I think we'll need to >>>>> hold sequential votes. Again to avoid complications. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Dave >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -Rob >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> Dave >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Pretty much in line to what you are thinking. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Pedro. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> --- Dom 3/6/12, Yong Lin Ma<[email protected]> ha scritto: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This was a discussion about rules of >>>>>>>>>> voting for new committer and PPMC >>>>>>>>>> member. We think it is more appropriate to let all >>>>>>>>>> contributors get >>>>>>>>>> involved in this. So I moved the discussion to ooo-dev. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> General process about voting in a new committer and PPMC >>>>>>>>>> member is here >>>>>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> By far the practice is most candidates were voted for >>>>>>>>>> committer and >>>>>>>>>> PPMC member at the same time. >>>>>>>>>> And no concreate critrial defined in public for AOO. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Your comments are welcomed. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> A comment from Rob: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> If it were entirely up to me I'd have it be like: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 1) Contributor -- anyone who contributes to the project, >>>>>>>>>> mailing list >>>>>>>>>> discussions, patches, translations, bug reports, doc, >>>>>>>>>> support.� This >>>>>>>>>> comes in all flavors and sizes.� We need to do a better >>>>>>>>>> job giving >>>>>>>>>> them credit and acknowledging their contributions.� If >>>>>>>>>> the feeling is >>>>>>>>>> that someone is not valued unless they are voted in as a >>>>>>>>>> PPMC member, >>>>>>>>>> then we're doing something wrong. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 2) Committer -- The threshold question:� Do we >>>>>>>>>> trust their judgement >>>>>>>>>> with respect to the area of their contributions?� The >>>>>>>>>> move from >>>>>>>>>> contributor to committer is a move from RTC (patches must be >>>>>>>>>> reviewed) >>>>>>>>>> to CTR.� So we really need to have a sense that they >>>>>>>>>> are doing quality >>>>>>>>>> work.� Committers also have veto rights on all of our >>>>>>>>>> commits.� So we >>>>>>>>>> need to trust their judgement. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 3) PMC member -- The threshold question:� Do they >>>>>>>>>> understand The >>>>>>>>>> Apache Way and our community-based decision making? On >>>>>>>>>> average are >>>>>>>>>> they solving more community problems than they are >>>>>>>>>> causing?� Are they >>>>>>>>>> helping others in the community succeed?� When we >>>>>>>>>> graduate, and our >>>>>>>>>> Mentors move on to other podlings, the PMC collectively >>>>>>>>>> needs to >>>>>>>>>> mentor new members to the project.� So I think the PMC >>>>>>>>>> is more about >>>>>>>>>> trusting their community skills rather than their technical >>>>>>>>>> skills. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> It might be possible for someone to qualify for 2 and 3 >>>>>>>>>> at the same >>>>>>>>>> time.� But probably not in every case. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Note:� This is not how we have operated >>>>>>>>>> previously.� I think there was >>>>>>>>>> an bootstrapping issue where we needed to have a PPMC >>>>>>>>>> suitably large >>>>>>>>>> and diverse to provide balance.� We also obviously >>>>>>>>>> started with a PPMC >>>>>>>>>> consisting of people who did not fully understand >>>>>>>>>> Apache.� That is the >>>>>>>>>> nature of Incubation.� But I don't think this approach >>>>>>>>>> is necessarily >>>>>>>>>> something we should continue with a year later, as we >>>>>>>>>> approach >>>>>>>>>> graduation. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>>> MzK >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "So let it rock, let it roll >>>>>>>> Let the bible belt come and save my soul >>>>>>>> Hold on to sixteen as long as you can >>>>>>>> Changes come around real soon make us woman and men." >>>>>>>> -- "Jack and Diane", John Mellencamp >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> MzK >>>> >>>> "So let it rock, let it roll >>>> Let the bible belt come and save my soul >>>> Hold on to sixteen as long as you can >>>> Changes come around real soon make us woman and men." >>>> -- "Jack and Diane", John Mellencamp >>> >> >
