I like Morgan's suggestion -- the expectation of committers is that they're
active and actively working the project; if they're not participating and not
responding to emails, it's reasonable to remove them from the committer file. As
folks say, this isn't a "punishment for bad faith" but a recognition that people
move on from companies, roles, or projects. Having an automated way to handle
this sounds reasonable…..
>From my perspective, our TSC isn't focusing on what it needs to focus on if
they're voting on the removal of every nonactive committer on every project.
That's also not entirely a scalable solution as we continue to grow as a
community. Empowering PTLs to manage their committers with the help of automated
tools seems like the right thing to do.
This also relates to our community metrics discussion; if some projects
experience much higher than average turnover in committers, it might be a reason
to see what's going on and if the project needs help in some way. Focusing on
how to enable and help projects be successful and removing obstacles if they're
having issues is a good use of time; micro-managing committer lists is not.
My $.02.
Heather
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 11:46 AM, Raymond Paik [email protected]
wrote:
Please see an example from May of this year:
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/TSC#TSC-May17,2016 when the VSPERF PTL
had several inactive committers who were non-responsive/not reachable.
If this is still too taxing for the PTLs, we can have a discussion in the TSC
call....
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 1:33 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:
in line with Yujun
no need to attend TSC to remove non active committers
usually we can do it through a patch of INFO file
the only case I can see a need to attend TSC is in case of
conflict but I never saw that so far
during OpenStack Barcelona, we mentioned that it would be also
nice to implement something to automatically remove 6 months non
active contributors.
the idea is not to blame but to clean the repo and reflect the
reality of the project activity
I agree that there are no commitments, people can move from one
project to another
however it is better to have a good idea of the project activity
and then keeping long list of non active contributors is
misleading
So I would suggest to implement a job that will automatically
remove a contributor Y of a project X if no activitiy has been
reported since more than 6 months
If the project has no commitor anymore or only the PTL or empty
repo since x months => raise an alarm to TSC to clean also the
project
/Morgan
Le 14/12/2016 à 08:31, joehuang a écrit :
+1000 for this "I never think it is a shame to leave a
project, since it is normal that people move on to a new target
and didn't have time to say goodbye"
Best Regards
Chaoyi Huang (joehuang)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Yujun
Zhang [[email protected]]
Sent: 14 December 2016 15:10
To: joehuang; Raymond Paik
Cc: opnfv-tech-discuss
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] committer list
maintainance
I think there is no mandatory rule for PTL to
attend TSC meeting in order to complete the removal
process. At least, I never did that before.
On my side, I have tried to contact several
inactive committers to ask for their willingness and
most of them replies politely to explain why. And we
have a happy ending by putting them in retired
list[1].
I did encounter the situation that losing contact
to some committer. And we just ask TSC to approve the
removal and that's it.
After all, I never think it is a shame to leave a
project, since it is normal that people move on to a
new target and didn't have time to say goodbye.
[1]: https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/qtip/Platform+Performance+Benchmarking#
PlatformPerformanceBenchmarking-RetiredCommitters
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 2:17 PM joehuang
<[email protected]>
wrote:
In OPNFV we "assume bad faith"? This is not a good
assumption.
The less meeting, the better,
and usually a TSC meeting will be in the night or
early morning for me to join. If even need to go
to TSC meeting for 5 minutes for approval, I would
prefer to retain the inactive committer there,
just let it be.
Best Regards
Chaoyi Huang (joehuang)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:
Raymond Paik [[email protected]]
Sent: 14 December
2016 13:33
To: joehuang
Cc:
opnfv-tech-discuss
Subject: Re:
[opnfv-tech-discuss] committer list
maintainance
Joe,
On the first point,
I'm not sure why you are saying you need
to be committer to submit a patch in
OPNFV. There are plenty of regular
contributors who submit code/patches to
OPNFV. Let me know if I'm not
understanding your point.
On your second point,
I can recall a few committers who
voluntarily stepped down in the past few
of months. One of them was your Board
member Wenjing who stepped down as a
committer for QTIP. One of the reasons
why TSC approval is desired for revoking
committer status is to prevent PTLs from
potentially acting in bad faith. I don't
know if there are any PTLs in OPNFV who
would act in bad faith, but it's good to
have checks & balances. Is it really
that difficult to send an email to the TSC
mailing list and then come to the TSC
meeting for 5 minutes to get an approval?
Others in the
community are welcome to weigh in on
this...
Thanks,
Ray
On Tue,
Dec 13, 2016 at 9:10 PM, joehuang <[email protected]>
wrote:
Hello, Raymond,
My suggestion
is to update the TSC Charter.
Compared to OpenStack core
reviewer/contributor maintenance,
often feel that OPNFV governance
brings lots of inconvenience:
For example,
if one wants to submit a patch,
he/she usually has to be a
committer in OPNFV before he
submit a patch. But in OpenStack,
anyone is able to submit a patch,
and core reviewers will make sure
this patch should be approved or
not. If one is nominated as
committer to be a core reviewer,
and pass the voting, then any
other core reviewer can add the
new one to core reviewer list, but
in OPNFV, you have to submit a
patch or ask help from help-desk.
And another
example, I seldom find that
there is a stepping down
notification in OPNFV mail-list
from committer(yes, I saw some
PTL stepping down notification),
it seems not the fashion in
OPNFV. But in OpenStack, a core
reviewer is quite important role
in code review, if he is not
able to do the core reviewer
responsibility, he will send a
notification to the OpenStack
mail-list.
I really
don't know the reason why when
we find some committer is
inactive in the past 6 months,
we need the approve from TSC?
Best Regards
Chaoyi Huang
(joehuang)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:
Raymond Paik [[email protected]]
Sent:
14 December 2016 12:43
To:
joehuang
Cc:
opnfv-tech-discuss
Subject:
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss]
committer list maintainance
Joe,
If
there's an inactive
committer (for more
than 6 months) and the
PTL is not able to
reach that committer
for whatever reason,
the PTL needs to make
a request to the TSC
to revoke the
committer status. The
PTL should not do this
unilaterally.
Please
see the 8th paragraph
in the Section 8 of
the TSC Charter (
https://www.opnfv.org/developers/technical-project-governance/tsc-charter)...
Thanks,
Ray
On Tue, Dec
13, 2016 at 6:18 PM,
joehuang <[email protected]>
wrote:
Hello,
In
each project's
wiki page, we
often list
committers and
contributors,
as OPNFV's
ongoing
development,
some new
committers
come, some
committers
grow other
interesting
and put less
focus on the
old project.
I
have one
suggestion for
the
maintenance on
committer
list: for
those who have
shifted
interest, for
example, not
shown in the
weekly meeting
and mail-list
discussion (
all these
could be found
in the log) in
the past 6
months, but
they forget to
send a
stepping down
notification
in the
mail-list, PTL
should be able
to move the
committer to
the
contributor
list by
default, and
update the
list in the
git repository
too.
It's
not good idea
( not polite
too :-) ) to
send mail to
ask "hey,
would you
continue to
contribute in
the project,
if not, I'll
remove you
from the
committer
list".
Best Regards
Chaoyi
Huang
(joehuang)
_______________________________________________
opnfv-tech-discuss
mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
_______________________________________________
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
_______________________________________________
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
--
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA
Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager
tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
[email protected]
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou
falsifie. Merci.
This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged
information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete
this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been
modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.
_______________________________________________
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
Heather KirkseyDirector, OPNFVMobile: +1.512.917.7938Email/Google Talk:
[email protected]: HeatherReneeKirkseyIRC: HKirksey
_______________________________________________
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
