Thanks for drafting the doc!
Having guidelines is a good thing, however I feel that it's too "coding
oriented". Not every "good contributor" writes code, but organizes
events, talks about Iceberg, etc. And vice versa not every good coder
likes to speak publicly. This applies to both committers and PMC members.
Would also be good to remove the subjective measures.
Maybe, just a thought, simplify the proposal around something like:
* "A person having at least 3 months of continuous engagement
in/around/for the Apache Iceberg project is eligible to be nominated
as a committer to the Iceberg project."
* "A person having at least 6 months of continuous engagement
in/around/for the Apache Iceberg project is eligible to be nominated
as a PMC member of the Iceberg project."
Plus: list possible areas of engagement, for example:
* Code contributions and/or reviews
* Design contributions and/or reviews
* Speaking at conferences or meetups
* Mentoring users
* Mentoring contributors
* Other community relevant activities
Robert
On 25.06.24 20:10, Jack Ye wrote:
Hi everyone,
Here is a draft proposal for the guidelines for committership and PMC
membership:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ka0F9Cn0QeL3IJbds3aGyz3XLnzlS5khoY5B8yogA8E/edit
The guideline is trying to provide some concrete directions, without
being too specific. Not sure if I did a good job on that, since I tend
to be too specific about things... We can continue to iterate on it!
There are also some points that I think are a bit controversial. I
intentionally put them in the proposal as a starting point for debates.
Please take a look and let me know what everyone thinks!
Best,
Jack Ye
--
Robert Stupp
@snazy
