Re: Formalize Committer Proposal and Application Procedure

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 12:31:23PM -0700, Bhavin Thaker wrote: > The criteria should look not only at Quantity but at the Quality of work as > well. Just as one additional data point: http://community.apache.org/newcommitter.html is the Apache Community Development Project's guidelines. For

Re: Formalize Committer Proposal and Application Procedure

I agree with Sebastian. The criteria should look not only at Quantity but at the Quality of work as well. This page for Apache committer criteria describes the criteria pretty well. https://hadoop.apache.org/committer_criteria.html - *A history of sustained contribution to the project.

Re: Formalize Committer Proposal and Application Procedure

Another thing might be that having too many committers makes it less valuable to become a committer and therefore discourage new people. In my experience, quite the opposite is true: Having many committers is beneficial for a project and makes life easier for everybody. There's more eyes to

Re: Formalize Committer Proposal and Application Procedure

On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Isabel Drost-Fromm wrote: > On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 12:27:16PM +0100, Chiyuan Zhang wrote: > > Suppose we lower the standard or completely remove the formal standard > for > > committers, then we could probably be able to get more committers

Re: Formalize Committer Proposal and Application Procedure

We totally understand the apache way of doing things and the projects has always been welcoming users as contributors from days of DMLC. This happens in MXNet, as well as other project, for example XGBoost ( https://github.com/dmlc/xgboost) , another project that originated from DMLC have most of

Re: Formalize Committer Proposal and Application Procedure

> > Could you provide an example that provides a likely (imaginary if you'd > like) candidate? Mu's a pretty bad example for a new committer :) From the > attached doc I walk away thinking that I need to contribute for 2 years > before I can become a committer. For example, I think

Re: Formalize Committer Proposal and Application Procedure

My experience from the existing open-source project we have is that the developers are willing to contribute back as long as the software they use are hold up to a standard. I do not meant to say that the contributions of the language, documentations and others do not count as contributions to

Re: Formalize Committer Proposal and Application Procedure

FYI here is the comitter checklist from Apache Mesos http://mesos.apache.org/documentation/latest/committer-candidate-checklist/ which I mainly adopted from Tianqi On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 8:14 AM, Madan Jampani wrote: > There is a middle ground here. Instead of saying

Re: Formalize Committer Proposal and Application Procedure

There is a middle ground here. Instead of saying someone either has full committer privileges or zero, an alternative is to have scope of ownership start small and localized to modules or source folders where their primary contributions currently lie. For example, there are folks who contributed

Re: Formalize Committer Proposal and Application Procedure

There are trade-offs. On one side, a small group of "core" committers who understands the whole picture makes the project move swiftly and safely. On the other side, the reward of becoming committer is really important to encourage more contributors. I think Tianqi's proposal gives a good

Re: Formalize Committer Proposal and Application Procedure

On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 12:27:16PM +0100, Chiyuan Zhang wrote: > Suppose we lower the standard or completely remove the formal standard for > committers, then we could probably be able to get more committers from the > first type. But that might not necessarily be good to us Can you elaborate

Re: Formalize Committer Proposal and Application Procedure

Hi all, just want to share my bits. I like the idea of formalizing the committer proposal mechanism. The actual standard for what count as good enough for a committer could be discussed. I think the worrying of not being able to recruit new committers might not be a serious problem. I am thinking

Re: Formalize Committer Proposal and Application Procedure

On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 12:42:12AM -0700, Henri Yandell wrote: > I worry that it creates a high barrier to entry. +1 from my side to that worry. Isabel

Re: Formalize Committer Proposal and Application Procedure

I worry that it creates a high barrier to entry. It's a far more common pattern for a project to do poorly at recruiting new committers, than it is for one to recruit too many. Could you provide an example that provides a likely (imaginary if you'd like) candidate? Mu's a pretty bad example for

Re: Formalize Committer Proposal and Application Procedure

Forward my comment in private mail list: I agree that it would be nice to have some quantitative standards to evaluate the candidates. Let's encourage the future candidates do this. - Ziheng On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 09:44 Mu Li wrote: > It seems that this thread didn't show