Just to point out, Geode is a large, complicated codebase and we all work together to validate code changes. It’s more about trusting someone to follow the community process and ethos.
Anthony > On Jan 7, 2016, at 7:13 AM, Michael Stolz <[email protected]> wrote: > > This makes a lot of sense to me. > > Once we have seen enough high quality work product to remove the need to > check their work, they are qualified to be committers. > > -- > Mike Stolz > Principal Engineer - Gemfire Product Manager > Mobile: 631-835-4771 > On Jan 6, 2016 9:17 PM, "Dan Smith" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> After the discussion on private@geode, I personally came away liking this >> criteria the best - A person should become a committer at the point at >> which it is obvious that I'd rather have them check directly into SCM than >> merge the patch myself based on the contributions I've seen from them so >> far. >> >> I do think being involved in these different areas - code changes,mailing >> list, jira, wiki, etc. - helps build trust, but I don't think potential >> committers should be required to contribute to a bunch of different >> categories. Also, I think looking at the dashboard is not a good way to >> judge a potential committer - a count doesn't really tell you that much >> about how much you trust someone's contributions. >> >> -Dan >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 5:30 PM, Greg Chase <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> With the occasion of a request to vote in our first additional committer, >>> its become clear that we don't have clear criteria for when someone >> should >>> become a committer. >>> >>> The steps for becoming a committer are listed here in the wiki: >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Becoming+a+committer >>> >>> And include these steps: >>> >>> >>>> 1. Once you become a contributor you *will probably be invited by* >>>> another committer to be a new committer and *the community will >> vote* >>>> >>>> >>>> 1. *If the vote pass *and you get accepted... >>>> >>>> >>> But there are no criteria by which someone should be nominated, or by >> which >>> committers / PPMC should vote according to. >>> >>> In a discussion on private@geode, a number of good points have been >> raised >>> which I will paraphrase. The makers of these points can choose to weigh >> in >>> directly to this thread if they want their statement refined or >> attributed >>> to them. >>> >>> 1. "The Committers" are currently the same as "The PPMC". So at this >>> point, voting someone as a committer is voting them as the potential >> future >>> PMC of Apache Geode. >>> >>> 2. Becoming a committer should be used to recognize a contributor as >> having >>> further potential to contribute even more, and to encourage them to >>> participate with and collaborate more with the community. >>> >>> In my personal opinion, contributors who show themselves as >> collaborative, >>> community building, or supportive of users with a likelihood of >>> contributing even more should be nominated and likely voted by the PPMC >> to >>> be a contributor. >>> >>> While not the only source, many behaviors related to being collaborative, >>> community building, or supportive of users is captured by our community >>> dashboard: http://projects.bitergia.com/apache-geode/browser/ >>> >>> Thus I'd expect high contributors in these areas to rank in top lists as >>> follows: >>> >>> Collaborative: >>> Jiras: open, comment, close >>> Dev mail list: open threads, reply >>> Git: commits >>> Code reviews >>> >>> Someone who does not collaborate and only develops would likely only show >>> up in pull requests, but not other collaborative infrastructure. >>> >>> Community building would include: >>> Dev & user mail lists >>> Wiki / confluent editing >>> >>> User supporting would incldue: >>> User mail list responses >>> Jiras opened and commented on >>> >>> I'm sure these lists can be better refined. >>> >>> While I wouldn't quantify this, I would argue that if someone shows up in >>> multiple categories of contribution on top lists for more than one 30 day >>> period, they are likely candidates to be nominated as a committer. >>> >>> I know of at least a couple of companies that pay their employees to be >>> contributors to Apache Geode. If their job changes, or they move to a >>> different company, will they stay as a contributor if we make them a >>> committer? I'd argue this is much more likely if we see them >> contributing >>> in multiple categories rather than just a single way. >>> >>> Finally, we need to create a model and standard of how we want our >>> community to act. By being more specific about asking for broader >>> contribution to be recognized as a committer, this will help train new >>> members of this community how to participate fully. >>> >>> I'll appreciate comments on these, and if I get enough agreement, I will >>> add a proposed criteria to the wiki. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> -Greg >>> >>
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
