On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 11:13 AM Frances Perry <f...@google.com.invalid> wrote:
> In addition, since its not called out on your project page, which of these > > are current PPMC members and which are just committers? Everyone is > listed > > as committer on http://incubator.apache.org/projects/beam.html . > > > You can find the PPMC/committer distinction on the Beam site: > http://beam.incubator.apache.org/contribute/team/ Perfect responses on everything below. Sounds good. I hate to be a PITA about it, but can you merge http://beam.incubator.apache.org/contribute/team/ into http://incubator.apache.org/projects/beam.html ? This way we have a clear call out about who is on the PPMC right now. > > > I'm a bit > > worried about the "private/indirectly" comment made somewhere else (not > > mixing public/private emails...) > > > There are folks on the PPMC who were not active during incubation and have > chosen to decline going forwards. I believe Davor's "private/indirect" > comment referred to an offline discussion I had. There was an original PPMC > member who never even signed up for the Beam mailing lists. I wanted to > make sure he was aware call for folks to opt in to the resolution, so I > told him in person to make sure he didn't miss a chance to respond in the > affirmative. > > > > If you include committers, that adds representation from DataTorrent and > > > Smoking Hand, reducing Google representation to 53%. > > > > > > > > I feel like this number.. the fact that it's being counted is a bit odd. > > While we want to make sure the community is diverse, I would be hesitant > to > > add people just because it counters Google's direct influence on the > > project. Even if Google only makes up 20% of a proposed PMC, if it's > > housing 90% of the active developers on the project that would still > give a > > single company higher influence. > > > > I calculated this number for Beam when it came up during Geode's graduation > discussion as something this group may pay attention to. Just trying to > save folks the effort of digging it up themselves if interested ;-) > > I totally agree that affiliation is not a reason to add someone. But I do > think that this is a sign of increasing diversity within the project when > new folks from other projects and companies continue to get involved and > make significant contributions. >
