Also, I'm not quite clear on what is meant by "running" a release. Do you mean a committer not on the PMC functioned as Release Manager? Normally someone who does that is sending a clear-cut signal that they belong on the PMC, because all that work they are doing is being done on behalf of the PMC. I consider it a highly awkward situation when a Release Manager does not have a binding vote on their own damned release (well for a normal PMC).
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 12:44 AM, Joe Schaefer <joes...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Chris. So what I'm saying is, instead of adopting the position > that "we" have made up our minds on this matter well before joining the > incubator, why not recognize that at this point your community now includes > new committers and new community members following along for which their > voices have not been heard from on this matter. Once you recognize that > the > community has changed a bit, it makes sense to revisit a chestnut like > this on- > list. > > > > On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 12:26 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) < > chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote: > >> +1 to the below. >> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. >> Chief Architect >> Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398) >> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA >> Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527 >> Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov >> WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department >> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Joe Schaefer <joes...@gmail.com> >> Reply-To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org> >> Date: Wednesday, November 4, 2015 at 8:49 PM >> To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org> >> Subject: Re: Concerning Sentry: A disagreement over the Apache Way and >> graduation >> >> >Just to contrast this with the IPMC itself, we discuss everything here, >> >including past decisions. >> >Almost everything that happens here is a community decision, and we try >> to >> >move with near >> >unanimous consent. It is generally hard to figure out what roles people >> >have without some formal >> >VOTE where people indicate a binding status on it. >> > >> >That is what you should aspire to on your dev list- it really shouldn't >> >matter what roles people have >> >unless we need to be looking at a release. >> > >> > >> > >> >On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 11:37 PM, Joe Schaefer <joes...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> This may sound a bit pedantic, but the "Sentry project" isn't capable >> of >> >> considering anything. >> >> Either you are referring to a decision of the committers or the PPMC or >> >> the community, all >> >> of which requires some discussion over time about any position being >> >> taken. I would consider >> >> it unusual for the project participants to be unanimous on a situation >> >> like this or other related >> >> matters, and certainly opinions evolve over time. >> >> >> >> Nobody should put themselves in a position of speaking on behalf of the >> >> project. That is why >> >> we have communication channels in the first place and generally refer >> to >> >> on list decisions. >> >> The individual positions of the participants should be reflected in any >> >> consensus-based decision >> >> making. Not to say everything must be voted on, but collective >> decision >> >> making requires >> >> open communication, preferably on public channels. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 8:26 PM, Lenni Kuff <lsk...@cloudera.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> I think there is some confusion here. The Sentry project has never >> >>> considered Committer == PMC. The recent website change was only to >> help >> >>> clarify the roles of each of the members of the project, it was not >> the >> >>> result of any decision being made. >> >>> >> >>> Thanks, >> >>> Lenni >> >>> >> >>> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 3:03 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> >> >>> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > On Nov 4, 2015, at 2:05 PM, Lenni Kuff <lsk...@cloudera.com> wrote: >> >>> > >> >>> > >> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 10:05 AM, P. Taylor Goetz >> >>><ptgo...@gmail.com> >> >>> > >> wrote: >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> On Nov 4, 2015, at 11:32 AM, Joe Brockmeier <j...@zonker.net> >> >>>wrote: >> >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> * I would invite folks with access to go to Sentry's private >> list >> >>> and >> >>> > >>> look over discussions about adding new contributors, and >> >>>discussions >> >>> > >>> about the project in general. >> >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> I took a look. >> >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> From a community growth perspective, I see them adding new >> >>> committers, >> >>> > >>> which is a good thing. What I don’t see is any discussion at all >> >>> about >> >>> > >>> adding PPMC members, nor any discussion about why they chose to >> >>>go >> >>> the >> >>> > >>> Committer != PPMC route. >> >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> In a thread related to the first new committer being added [1], >> >>>it >> >>> is >> >>> > >>> pointed out that the podling website stated that Sentry was >> >>> Committer >> >>> > == >> >>> > >>> PMC, but that the new member vote was only for Committer. At >> that >> >>> point >> >>> > >> it >> >>> > >>> looks like the website was updated to reflect Committer != PMC. >> >>>From >> >>> > that >> >>> > >>> point on, all new member votes were for Committer only, and >> there >> >>> were >> >>> > no >> >>> > >>> discussions regarding adding new PMC members or promoting >> >>> committers to >> >>> > >> the >> >>> > >>> PMC role. >> >>> > >>> >> >>> > >>> What I find slightly disconcerting is that there doesn’t seem to >> >>>be >> >>> any >> >>> > >>> consideration or discussion around growing the PPMC and why >> >>>that’s >> >>> > >>> important. Sure they have 20-odd PPMC members from the initial >> >>> > committers >> >>> > >>> list, so it would take a pretty large exodus to render the >> >>>project >> >>> > unable >> >>> > >>> to function, but I don’t see anything to indicate that they >> >>> understand >> >>> > >> the >> >>> > >>> function and importance of growing the PPMC. >> >>> > > >> >>> > > Background: I am a Sentry community member. >> >>> > > >> >>> > > I would have to disagree with this. We have identified lack of new >> >>> PPMC >> >>> > > members as an issue and called out in our board reports. We are >> >>>also >> >>> > > encouraging non-PPMC members to get involved in ways they can >> >>>become >> >>> PPMC >> >>> > > members - for example, we have had non-PPMC members run two of the >> >>> last >> >>> > > Sentry releases. As mentioned earlier, it's not like there is no >> >>> progress >> >>> > > here, we have people who are very close (and I agree that we can >> >>>do a >> >>> > > better job discussing this on or private@ list). We are also >> >>> > encouraging >> >>> > > others in the community to step up, giving them opportunities, and >> >>> really >> >>> > > striving to build a community around the project. >> >>> > >> >>> > Fair enough. >> >>> > >> >>> > Can you point me to the discussion where the project decided to go >> >>>with >> >>> > Committer != PMC over Committer == PMC? >> >>> > >> >>> > From an outsider's perspective, that decision just looks like a >> >>>single >> >>> > commit, without any public discussion, which speaks to the concerns >> >>> others >> >>> > have raised about decisions being made in private. >> >>> > >> >>> > -Taylor >> >>> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> >>> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
