One interesting guideline I’ve seen a podling use recently was having PMC members only be nominated by people they don’t already work with. That certainly helps improve diversity of interests rather than allowing a single company to have shadow influence. I’d imagine any efforts to make releases more easy to validate for less technical people would help in getting more participation there, too, since that’s one of the primary responsibilities of the PMC.
On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 04:45 Elek, Marton <e...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > On 8/10/20 5:18 PM, Myrle Krantz wrote: > > > Hi Marton, > > > > > > I think the approach of including people from end user companies is an > > > excellent idea. I recently completed my master's thesis on vendor > > > neutrality in open source, and one of my conclusions was that PMCs should > > > strive to include representation from any group that directly benefits > > > economically from the open source project. In many cases, this will > > > naturally include the vendors participating in an open source project. > But > > > it could indicate a need to look beyond just those vendors. > > > > > > Still, I hesitate to accept the idea that one person on your PMC alone > > > should be responsible for D&I. It might set your project up for conflict > > > if not everyone is striving to achieve that goal. And it gives that > aspect > > > of your project a bus factor of 1.* > > > > > > If people on your project are interested in D&I, do you think multiple > > > members of the PMC can share that responsibility? > > > > Thanks the answer (and sorry for the late response). > > > > I totally agree, it shouldn't be the responsibility of one person, it > > should be responsibility of everyone. > > > > But still don't know how can we be sure that we don't miss something. > > Based on our current discussions, my impression is that our (active > > project members/PMC) thinking scheme are very similar inside the project. > > > > It's more like a generic question: what are the steps which can help to > > make the project governance more inclusive, continuously. I had a few > > ideas until now, but nothing is perfect: > > > > 1. Get feedback from an "external eye" (see the beginning of this thread) > > > > 2. Generate very detailed statistics which can include all kind of > > contributions (hard to include some contributions, like handling twitter > > account) [1] > > > > 3. Define and agree in inclusive rules (to nominate a PMC) and try to > > use them. > > > > 4. Reduce the required trust to nominate somebody to a committer > > > > > > But none of these are perfect and all them have the own difficulty to > > implement it. > > > > Marton > > > > [1]: earlier attempt: > > https://www.kaggle.com/quinooj/apache-hadoop-ozone-github-contributions > > -- Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
