Perhaps "accept" is a better word than "follow", no one has ever questioned it in such detail.
If there's disagreement about advice given then there only needs to be a willingness to discuss the matter. Obviously there are votes if things get out of hand but it's rare for things to go that far. If committers are unwilling to approach a disagreement with an open mind then it makes life difficult for everyone. Regards Scott On 18/10/2014, at 1:04 am, Pierre Smits <pierre.sm...@gmail.com> wrote: > Scott, > > Am I correct in understanding that any contributor with ambitions to be a > committer should interpret your 'willing to follow advice' as 'willingness > to take good advice into consideration when acting within the community or > dealing with issues, but don't follow bad advice blindly'? Your 'willing to > follow' sounds a lot like 'must follow'. I trust that wasn't your > intention... > > Or am I misinterpreting this? > > 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 1:11 PM, Scott Gray <scott.g...@hotwaxmedia.com> > wrote: > >> 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 >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >> >>
