Hi Sebb, > On Jul 8, 2021, at 4:51 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, 8 Jul 2021 at 00:53, Craig Russell <apache....@gmail.com> wrote: > >> And do we really need the field for PMC Vote? > > I think there needs to be some way to check that an email sent from a > prospective committer has the backing of a (P)PMC. > That is why I suggested separating the filing of the ICLA from > requesting the account.
My interest is in minimizing the back-n-forth with the PMC, the prospective committer, secretary, and operations. IIRC, when I was secretary, I started doing the "new account request" as part of the ICLA filing because it reduced the round trips needed. So for me, the minimum tripping needed is: PMC votes a new committer and checks to see if the candidate is already a committer on another project or has already filed an ICLA. - already a committer, PMC asks candidate and if accept, do the whimsy roster thing - already filed an ICLA, PMC asks candidate to verify public name, email address and requested id, and if accept, do the whimsy new account thing (note that the whimsy new account thing might post an action for secretary or keep it like it is today) - has not filed an ICLA, PMC asks candidate to verify not a committer and no icla yet filed, and please file an ICLA with email address, project, and requested id. Secretary does the rest, just like today. > > The potential committer sends the ICLA. This is checked for > self-consistency (only) and filed, with a reply back to the sender and > the (P)PMC if specified. The additional details required for LDAP are > saved along with the email as key. We do not need another round trip if everything is in order (VOTE from (P)PMC, project, requested id). > > If the request has the backing of the (P)PMC, they login to Whimsy to > request that the account be created. > They only need to provide the email. My experience is that often the PMC does not know the email under which the ICLA was filed. I'll raise another mail thread on this topic. > At which point the Secretary can > create the LDAP account and add it to the committer group for the > (P)PMC. It could be left to the (P)PMC to add them as members once the > NOTICE has been served. NOTICE should be given and 72 hours passed before inviting the candidate. > > If it is desired that the Secretary take on this role as well, then > the PMC will need to confirm that the proper NOTICE has been served. > However I think that PMCs need to take full responsibility for > updating their committee. Why should the Secretary do it when a new > account is being created and not subsequently? Many times the ICLA is filed missing important information which the candidate should provide at the time they accept the invitation. > >> The second entry would be for secretary to handle new account requests from >> PMC members. The new-account-reqs.txt doesn't have quite enough information >> to create new accounts because it is missing sn and givenName. Should we >> define a new file format for the additional information or do something else >> entirely? Let's not define a new file format. If the original ICLA is missing information (project, requested id, updated email address), the candidate should provide it in reply to the PMC invitation. Secretary can use their judgement to provide the original sn and givenName, and if the new committer doesn't like it, they can change it themself. Best, Craig > > See above. > >> Craig >> >> Craig L Russell >> c...@apache.org >> Craig L Russell c...@apache.org
