[Note post TSC call: this is the email I had written and found in my
Drafts folder after the TSC call - so I had not sent it - DN]

Thank you for putting this together, Ray!

A few comments: Your wiki stats look off - I would expect to see many
more people in the list (of course the first thing I did out of vanity
was look for myself, and I have definitely made a number of wiki edits
and comments, but I am not in the list).

We have so far discussed erring on the side of inclusion, so I am
curious about your setting a bar at 50 or 100 contributions. It might
make sense to have a minimum number for some of the lower impact
activities like Gerrit reviews, but for others like patch submission, a
lower bound of 1 might make more sense. For wiki edits 5 or 10 seems
reasonable. If using a composite metric, I would lean towards a lower
number (say, 20) rather than higher, to be more inclusive.

Have you considered being active on the mailing list as a potential
market of activity? Again the question of whether people who are active
on the list, but inactive elsewhere, can be considered active
contributors (I think they could) - there, perhaps 30 emails during the
year is a good level.

I would also be interested to hear if there are people who previously
had a vote as committers, who would not have a vote under this scheme,
or whether there is a big difference in the size of the
community/electorate with your proposed levels.

What do you think?


On 02/12/2018 01:12 AM, Raymond Paik wrote:
> All, 
> This is for the TSC composition discussion on Tuesday.  
> As was discussed previously
> <http://meetbot.opnfv.org/meetings/opnfv-meeting/2018/opnfv-meeting.2018-01-25-14.01.html>,
> there was a consensus to look at a "union of contributions" across
> various tools in OPNFV including Git, Gerrit, JIRA, and Confluence.  For
> example, we talked about people making a total of 50 or 100
> contributions across all tools over a 12 month period as the constituent
> for the TSC election.
> In the attached, you'll see the data point across the 4 tools in 2017. 
> In the last tab, you'll also find a comparison of "top 50 contributors"
> across the tools.  Although there are some exceptions, you'll see that
> active contributors are active across all 4 tools.  One of the concerns
> was that we want to be inclusive to recognize non-code contributions and
> you'll see a high number of non-code contributors in both Gerrit and Jira.
> In terms of a threshold, 100 annual contributions seems like a good
> starting point.  As a point of reference, the following shows the number
> of people that made 100 or more contributions in each tool.  (Based on
> this, we'll have a minimum of 112 people eligible for the TSC election
> as we have 112 people that made 100 or more contributions to Gerrit alone)
>   * Gerrit: 112
>   * Git: 30
>   * JIRA: 36
>   * Wiki: 4
> If we go to 50 annual contributions, I don't necessarily think there'll
> be a significant increase in the pool and following is the breakdown.  
>   * Gerrit: 137
>   * Git: 51
>   * JIRA: 62
>   * Wiki: 8
> Please feel free to reply with any thoughts or feedback.  This will be
> discussed further during the TSC call.
> Thanks, 
> Ray
> _______________________________________________
> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Dave Neary - NFV/SDN Community Strategy
Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com
Ph: +1-978-399-2182 / Cell: +1-978-799-3338
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to