On 2024/06/24 07:38:47 Jack Ye wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I propose that we put up a bylaws document like other projects such as
> Apache Hadoop and Apache ORC. I think this will put people at peace and
> remove many people's concerns about the future of the project and its
> vendor-neutral stance.
>
> Here is a document that I have drafted that can be used as the starting
> point (mostly just copied from the Hadoop one):
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BVHbshE2dmCH8QzkeMd9PQdJ86_slavDy1YPueqNSgI/edit
Hi, friends. I have made a few comments in the doc. I want to clarify that I'm
*not* speaking here as a board member (and of course directors cannot,
individually, Speak For The Board), but as someone who has been a community
manager for going on 20 years.
A lot is being written about the (perceived) problems in the project, and
everyone seems to know what you should do about it. I certainly have my own
opinions. But you, not they, are tasked with shepherding this project.
I am aware that I'm an outsider, and that I have not earned a voice here.
However, I want to suggest, respectfully, that you intentionally include an
outsider (perhaps/probably not me) in this conversation, since it can be very
challenging for any group to see the solutions to the problems that they
themselves have helped to create. I encourage you to find someone outside of
your community who can have frank conversations with PMC members - particularly
those who are not in the "ruling class" - about the problems that they
perceive, and help steer the discussion.
I think that you're heading a good direction with this work, but I am concerned
about a few points, particularly the definition of "active". Rules around who
is "active" are almost always used, in practice, to amplify the voices of a
few, to the detriment of the many. I wrote about this some here:
https://drbacchus.com/who-are-the-active-maintainers/
Many projects, here and elsewhere, set the bar too high in defining who is
"active", who sould be a committer, and who should be a PMC member. I have
always encouraged projects to hand out committer like candy, because the risk
of making someone a committer "too early" is that you'll have to revert some of
their changes, while the risk of making them a committer too late is that
they'll go away and you'll be much poorer for having missed them. My standard
advice to every project is that any problems you may have, or may be perceived
to have, with neutrality, can and should be solved by inviting more voices to
the conversation, and welcoming committers (especially non-code committers!),
and PMC members, a little earlier than you're entirely comfortable with. It's
not a panacea, but is about as close as we can get in open source.
Thanks for doing this hard work.
