HI, Nice presentation.
Here my feedback on this some of this is more opinion (there’s many Apache ways) and some is just how things tends to be done in projects I’ve worked with. Slide 3: - We’re 6679 committers, 730 members, 199 top level PLCs, 52 podlings currently. [1] May be good to mention teh incubator and prodding projects. Slide 4 - While the chair is responsible for making sure teh report is submitted to the board, it's the PMC who writes and contrite to it. "The report is technically single-author written by the PMC chair.” is sometimes teh case but in some project its more of a collaborative effort. - While only the board can appoint the chair, the chair is usually selected by the PMC. Slide 6 - Rather than “Avoid toxic behaviours” I say “Discourage any toxic behaviour” - I’d be more explicit "Contributors represent themselves not the company they work for” - Code of conduct [2] should be mentioned here? in “Community > code”? Slide 7 - include “merit doesn’t expire” concept here - I think the toxic stuff needs some work Slide 8 - https://lists.apache.org is a better archive / search link Slide 9 - Voting on contentious issues can cause division and split the community, so care needs to be taken to build consensus before a vote of this nature. - Voting on releases is different, -1 is not a veto Slide 10 - CTR is much more common on ASF projects Slide 12 - The tick and crosses are misleading, committer can be involved in everything but don’t have binding votes including on releases. Slide 15 - Quick to review PRs need not apply with CTR and committer can mentor contributors as well in fact they may do that more than PMC members. I;’ll give some more feedback when I get a chance. Thanks, Justin 1. https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/ 2. https://www.apache.org/foundation/policies/conduct.html --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
