Re: PPMC guidance on new committers

[Craig L Russell]

Here's what I'd like to do with the ppmc guide. Change:
Voting in a new committer






The developer list, with notice posted to the Incubator general list.






to:

Voting in a new committer













Craig


On May 30, 2007, at 3:37 PM, Jean T. Anderson wrote:

If a developer has contributed a significant number of high-quality patches, is interested in continuing the contribution, and has demonstrated the ability to work well with others under the Apache guidelines, the project might vote to grant that developer commit access. See the ASF How it Works document, which explains meritocracy and roles. Discussion of a potential new committer should take place on the podling project's private list; normally it would take place on a project's private list. After vetting the new candidate, the vote can be called on either one of the two places listed below (notice the balance between private and public lists): The podling's private list, with notice posted to the Incubator private list. The practice of a private discussion followed by a public, pro-forma, vote is re-emerging as a Best Practice for ASF projects (see this comprehensive discussion about these practices). Only votes cast by Incubator PMC members are binding. If the vote is positive, and the contributor accepts the responsibility of a committer for the project, the contributor formally becomes an Apache committer. An Incubator PMC member should then follow the documented procedures to complete the process, and CC both the Incubator PMC and the PPMC when sending the necessary e-mails to root. Please direct the new committer to the Apache developer's pages, to the Apache Incubator site and to the Incubator Committers Guide for important additional information. If a developer has contributed a significant number of high-quality patches, is interested in continuing the contribution, and has demonstrated the ability to work well with others under the Apache guidelines, the project might vote to grant that developer commit access. See the ASF How it Works document, which explains meritocracy and roles. One of the PPMC members should lead the process of accepting a new committer. For the purposes of this document, the proposing PPMC member is referred to as the proposer, and the proposed committer is referred to as the nominee. Discussion of a nominee should take place on the podling project's private (PPMC) list [normally it would take place on a project's private list]. If there are any concerns raised during the discussion, these need to be resolved so that there is consensus among the PPMC members as to the suitability of the nominee for the project and for Apache. After vetting the nominee, the vote can be called on either one of the two places listed below (notice the balance between private and public lists): o The podling's private list, with notice posted to the Incubator private list. The notice is a separate email forwarding the vote email with a cover statement that this vote is underway on the podling's private list. This is a good approach if you are not sure of getting the required three +1 votes from incubator PMC members on the first vote. After completing the vote on the PPMC list, if there are not three +1 votes from incubator PMC members, the proposer should call a vote on the incubator PMC private list with a reference to the archived discussion and vote by the PPMC. o The podling's developer list, with notice posted to the Incubator general list. The notice is a separate email forwarding the vote email with a cover statement that this vote is underway on the podling's developer list. This is a good approach if you are sure of getting the required three +1 votes from incubator PMC members. It is embarrassing to have a public vote fail or take a very long time because not enough incubator PMC members vote and have to be solicited to vote for a committer. Only votes cast by Incubator PMC members are binding. If the vote is positive (three or more binding +1 votes and no binding -1 votes), the proposer offers committership to the nominee. If the nominee accepts the responsibility of a committer for the project, the nominee formally becomes an Apache committer. The proposer then asks an Incubator PMC member to follow the documented procedures to complete the process. If the nominee is already an Apache committer on another project, the proposer asks the incubator PMC chair to update the authorization file to include the nominee as a committer on the podling. If the nominee is not already an Apache committer, the incubator PMC member CC's both the Incubator PMC and the PPMC when sending the necessary e- mails to root. Normally, the incubator PMC member is a Mentor on the podling's PPMC but due to unavailability, the proposer can ask any incubator PMC member. The proposer then directs the new committer to the Apache developer's pages, to the Apache Incubator site, and to the Incubator Committers Guide for important additional information.

Craig L Russell wrote:

Hi Jean,

On May 30, 2007, at 8:11 AM, Jean T. Anderson wrote:

Craig L Russell wrote:

Hi Carl,

On May 30, 2007, at 6:14 AM, Carl Trieloff wrote:

One more question on this topic as I have also seen differing views from different members of the Incubator PMC on: "Who can and who can

not send the account setup mail to root?"

Given each new committer vote will have 3 PMC votes, why does a

from the general list?

mentor have to send the account setup to root? Why can't the mail to root just contain a link to the vote result with 3 PMC members on it

the request.

This is a question that I believe only infrastructure can answer. The issue is that right now, "root" has to respond only to emails from PMC chairs, and it's easy to verify that it's really the PMC chair sending

chair".

In the general PMC case, "root" responds to requests from PMC members: "The project PMC needs to send an email to root at apache.org requesting a new account to be created" [1]. It says "project PMC" not "project PMC

Thanks for the correction. I need to remind myself to read the entire
documentation every time, and not rely on memory. ;-)

pmc chair myself I don't want account requests to be held up just
because I don't happen to be around.

I don't know of anyone who has committed all apache docs to memory -- I sure haven't. :-) The only reason I'm attentive to this detail is as a

But I think the issue is that PPMCs aren't real PMCs,

Right.

so for the
Incubator the request should come from a mentor.

I'd prefer to say that the request must come from an incubator pmc
member.

yes; I think what matters to root is that the request is made from

by checking

somebody formally on the PMC, which makes this somebody easily verified https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/committers/board/committee- info.txt . Just like most of us haven't committed all apache docs to memory, root won't have committed the list of who is on which PMC to memory. We want

to make it easy for root to process that account request.

 -jean

But then the ppmc member who is managing the new committer
process should ask an incubator pmc member to make the root request,
and that incubator pmc member would naturally but not necessarily be
one of the podling's mentors.

Craig

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature