From my perspective the confluence document seems to outline everything pretty well.
I think the 'trust' aspect would simply be that a voting PMC member is able to trust that a potential committer would fulfill the the outlined roles and responsibilities. The 'attitude' would simply be that the potential committer is willing to follow advice and work well with others. Neither of these things are so strange that they'd need to be further documented IMO. I can't speak for Jacopo or anyone else, that's just my interpretation. Regards Scott On 17/10/2014, at 11:49 pm, Pierre Smits <pierre.sm...@gmail.com> wrote: > So, you - as any PMC member - can also elaborate on the consensus with > respect to the attitude and trustability requirements regarding potential > committers (above and beyond the responsibilities, if these exist). > > Or - as it may be possible that I have misinterpreted the posting by Jacopo > - is it just about potential committers having the right mindset towards > the execution of tasks as described in the roles and responsibilities > document? Meaning that they can apply due diligence before committing? And > that they can make their own interests subordinate to those of the > community? > > Regards, > > Pierre Smits > > *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* > Services & Solutions for Cloud- > Based Manufacturing, Professional > Services and Retail & Trade > http://www.orrtiz.com > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Scott Gray <scott.g...@hotwaxmedia.com> > wrote: > >> Pierre, >> >> Yes, in his opinion that is what we do. It's probably a correct opinion >> too (in my opinion). But at the end of the day my point stands, PMC >> members are individuals and each have different opinions about what makes a >> good committer. >> >> I'm not trying to be combative, if you disagree I'm happy to discuss it. >> >> Regards >> Scott >> >> On 17/10/2014, at 11:19 pm, Pierre Smits <pierre.sm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Scott, >>> >>> You are correct. Yet, you forgot to mention that Jacopo used 'we' in >> direct >>> relation to the words attitude and trust. So, he is not talking about >> just >>> his own feelings but about the collective perception. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Pierre Smits >>> >>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>> Services and Retail & Trade >>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Scott Gray <scott.g...@hotwaxmedia.com >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Pierre, >>>> >>>> Jacopo's first words in that email were "In my opinion". That's an >>>> extremely important point. >>>> >>>> There are no guidelines because each PMC member is free to vote however >>>> they feel would best serve the project. Any of us could provide our own >>>> personal guidelines but they would still just be personal opinions. >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> Scott >>>> >>>> On 17/10/2014, at 10:55 pm, Pierre Smits <pierre.sm...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Jacopo, >>>>> >>>>> I your posting regarding the vote to keep the PROJECTMGR in releases >> (see >>>>> here: http://ofbiz.markmail.org/message/maha6pwlatlxbb64 ) you >> addressed >>>>> aspects as ' the right attitude' and 'trust them' in respect to >> inviting >>>>> committers. >>>>> >>>>> In the committers role and responsibilities page (see here: >>>>> >>>> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/OFBiz+Committers+Roles+and+Responsibilities >>>>> ) we can read about the responsibilities. But words like attitude and >>>> trust >>>>> are not not mentioned. >>>>> >>>>> Can you, as the PMC Chair, explain what the vision and expectations are >>>>> regarding this right attitude and trust? >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>> >>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Jacopo Cappellato < >>>>> jacopo.cappell...@hotwaxmedia.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> In my opinion we should avoid reconsidering the idea of creating >>>>>> committers with limited access; instead I would prefer to invite >>>> committers >>>>>> when we trust them as individuals, when they have demonstrated the >> right >>>>>> attitude and skills to work in our community etc... and demonstrate >>>> enough >>>>>> technical skills for the work they have to do; even if it is limited >> to >>>> a >>>>>> subset of the OFBiz codebase they will get full access to the repos >> but >>>> of >>>>>> course they will limit their field of action to the area they know, >>>> without >>>>>> requiring us to enforce commit rights limitations. As I said this can >>>> only >>>>>> work if we trust them 100% as persons at first. >>>>>> >>>>>> Jacopo >>>>>> >>>> >> >>
