On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 12:57 PM Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 21/06/2023 19:57, Jeff Jirsa wrote: > > Member of the cassandra PMC, but responding here individually. I'm not > actually sure I actually support the idea of an MVP program, but do want to > point out that "PMC" has other special meaning: > > > > - A member of the PMC is (or at least was, and if it's changed, I missed > it) strictly required to be a committer. We've had threads in the past > about whether or not there was room for flexibility, and structurally the > answer was no. That's a problem because: > > > > - Committer requires signing an ICLA. That's a problem because: > > > > - Not all community members CAN sign an ICLA. Some are prevented from > doing so by employment restrictions or other legal requirements. So even if > it were the case that SOMEONE might be the type of contributor who a > project WOULD make a member of the PMC, some individuals CAN NOT accept > that. > > Yes, that is an issue. It would be interesting to get some numbers on > how often that happens and whether there is anything the ASF can do to > help reduce the frequency - e.g. engagement with employers. Probably a > topic for a separate thread. > > Regardless, it is pretty much inevitable given the size of the ASF that > there will be some people that can't sign the ICLA and that is an issue > worth trying to address. > > Note: Projects can invite whoever they like to join their private list. > It would be unusual but I can't think of any reason a project couldn't > have honorary PMC members (or similar name), subscribed to the private > list and their voices listened to as if there were PMC members - the > only difference being they would not be listed in committee-info.txt and > their votes would not be binding. > > > Beyond that: > > > > The PMC is permanent, irrevocable, and binding. > > Not quite. There are ways to remove bad actors from a PMC if necessary. > > > There are existence proofs of single bad actors on the PMC effectively > blowing up projects (I will show them to you if needed, but PMC members who > veto every single action and lead other contributors to fork). > > Been there. Got the t-shirt. Several times. And I hope I never have to > go there again. It is never pretty, always stressful and damages the > community. That it is rare is both good and bad. It is good it doesn't > happen often but the downside is there is relatively little experience > of dealing with it to draw on if you find yourself in that situation. > > > "This person is doing cool things to help the community THIS YEAR" is > not the same as "please be a driving force of the project forever". > > While there are bad actors, there represent a very small faction of the > community. I'd argue there is a greater risk of harm to the community by > having high bars for committership and PMC membership and excluding > folks than there is by having low bars and accepting the risk of a bad > actor. > > > On a personal level, I started working with Cassandra to solve a problem > at work, but I kept working on it because some company I had never heard of > sent me an email and a t-shirt that said MVP on it. I was nowhere NEAR the > level of contributions you'd need to be a committer, much less a member of > the PMC (a conference talk and a couple emails, no code contributed at > all). It was a nice marketing gesture for the project, and probably for the > company (maybe they assumed my employer would turn into a paying customer, > which definitely wasnt going to happen). > > I think there is plenty of room for that sort of contributor > appreciation. Putting on my VP Brand hat for a minute, I have approved > companies producing project branded swag for exactly this purpose. The > main concern is making sure it is community swag rather than corporate > swag. > > > All of that said: it feels weird. I can argue about why it's good and > important. It still feels weird. Emotionally, I don't love the idea, but we > also don't want affiliated companies running programs that may be > misconstrued as acting for the (trademarked) brand, and that's the typical > place you'd see a program like this. Microsoft has MVPs. AWS has community > heroes. Apache projects .... have merit within the project and within the > foundation, but again, permanent, binding, and requires contracts. > > It looks as if there are a couple of different issues here (long term > contributors that can't sign the ICLA, wider contributor recognition as > a way to build community, maybeothers). I think there are solutions to > these issues that don't require creation of a parallel / alternative > system of recognizing merit.` > > My main concern with a parallel system of merit recognition is that it > think it will encourage higher bars for committership and PMC membership > and that in turn is not good for the community. > I agree with that and I will add one more point. Nobody is more "valuable" or important than anyone else at the ASF. The committer / PMC designations are *can do* designations - they mean that the people having them *have agreed to serve the community and we trust them to do so* - not that they are more "valuable" than anybody else. When you get commit, you get to commit directly and you get to serve the community by reviewing and merging patches by other contributors. When you are voted in to a PMC, you get to review release candidates, vote on new committers / PMC members and deal with administrative and other issues in service to the community. Same applies when you become a member, a board member, officer of board chair. I strongly disagree with the idea of designating "MVPs" at any level in the ASF. Phil > > Mark > > > > > > > > > On 2023/06/21 18:42:37 Mark Thomas wrote: > >> Melissa, > >> > >> You haven't answered my question. > >> > >> ASF projects already have a mechanism for rewarding contributions. Why > >> do they need a separate one? > >> > >> Mark > >> > >> > >> On 21/06/2023 19:12, Melissa Logan wrote: > >>> Hi Mark, > >>> > >>> The goal is to provide documentation to projects on how to implement a > >>> community-run MVP program, should any project decide to do so. > >>> > >>> It would be optional and additive. > >>> > >>> On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 11:07 AM Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Every project already has a system for recognizing contributors in the > >>>> community - making them a committer (then PMC member). > >>>> > >>>> Why is there a need for a separate system? > >>>> > >>>> Mark > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 21/06/2023 18:55, Melissa Logan wrote: > >>>>> Hello CommDev people: > >>>>> > >>>>> Is there precedent at ASF for a community-run MVP program? If not, > would > >>>>> anyone like to collaborate on this to help provide guidance to ASF > >>>>> projects? And is CommDev the right place? > >>>>> > >>>>> In a recent Cassandra Marketing Working Group meeting (1) we > discussed > >>>> the > >>>>> idea of a community-hosted MVP program that adheres to ASF > governance. > >>>> MVP > >>>>> programs reward people who are actively contributing to/promoting a > >>>> project > >>>>> by designating them as "MVPs" and listing them on community channels > >>>> (e.g. > >>>>> project website). It's a great way to get people onboarded/involved, > >>>>> recruit committers, and grow awareness for a project. This would also > >>>>> create more opportunities for non-code contributions to a project. > >>>>> > >>>>> MVP would be a non-governing body (2); one would need to re-apply or > be > >>>>> nominated annually. > >>>>> > >>>>> Each PMC would have to approve of the MVP program and be part of the > MVP > >>>>> Committee to select MVPs each year. For the first year, the committee > >>>>> would include at least one PMC member, 3-5 active contributors that > will > >>>> be > >>>>> selected by the PMC member(s), and a program lead. In subsequent > years, > >>>> the > >>>>> committee would include PMC member(s), previous MVPs, and a program > lead. > >>>>> > >>>>> Doc below (3); feedback would be much appreciated. If you can't > access > >>>> it, > >>>>> let me know and I'll find another way to share. Thank you! > >>>>> > >>>>> (1) > >>>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/2023-06-07+Meeting > >>>>> (2) https://www-paulau.staged.apache.org/foundation/governance/ > >>>>> (3) > >>>>> > >>>> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/19sExbQFMBvEJPjE_YaZNZAp54I14Ez0sooybqm800qA/edit# > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org > >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org > >> > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org > >
