On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 11:00 PM, Joe Schaefer <joes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> PMC membership has nothing to do with technical mastery of the codebase, > which > is why I cringe every time I see people talking about what "the bar" should > be. > It's about trust. If you trust someone to work the gears on a release, > that has > considerable impact on the well-being of a project, and personally meets my > definition of "belongs on the PMC". > Makes sense. To answer you previous question on what is meant by "running" a release. The answer is yes, a committer functioned as a Release Manager. I do think we have people that are very close. > > > > On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 1:34 AM, Joe Schaefer <joes...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Thanks Lenni. If Joe will permit me to put some words in his mouth, > > he seems to be focused on how the project is solving coordination > problems. > > Coming to agreement on things like what to include in a release for > > instance, > > which jiras get punted to which release schedules, etc, it's hard to see > > the rhyme > > or reason why these things are happening with the timing you are using. > > > > I'm perfectly personally satisfied with the manner in which tickets are > > being resolved, > > but am inclined to trust Joe's instincts that more prior discussion about > > planning and > > such should be taking place on-list. David has echoed these concerns as > > well. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 1:28 AM, Lenni Kuff <lsk...@cloudera.com> wrote: > > > >> Thanks Joe. That was a powerful read and very inspiring. This should be > >> posted on a wiki someplace. > >> > >> I agree. This seems like an important topic to revisit on our list to > see > >> how the community feels - and more generally, discuss more topics (big, > >> small, new, old) more frequently moving forward. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Lenni > >> > >> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 9:44 PM, 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 > >> > > >>> > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > >>> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > >
