> On Aug 4, 2020, at 2:52 PM, leerho <lee...@gmail.com> wrote: > > John, > Thank you for your comments. > > First understand that this site (community.a.o) is maintained by comdev. >> Podlings should be following the processes at http://incubator.apache.org/ > > > I searched incubator.a.o and could not find any comparable documentation > that is step-by-step with example template emails. There are several pages > devoted to educating new committers, but I could not find much on inviting > new committers. So in the absence of good documentation I used what I > could find. Also, I have never read anywhere that podlings should not be > reading or following the ASF documentation. Presumably, the ASF > documentation preempts incubator documentation in most cases. > > No. Why do you think it will disappear into the "bit-bucket"? The >> candidate would have the email in their inbox and would be able to archive >> it/save it for reference however they choose fit. > > > Because it has been over 24 hours since our candidate replied and it still > does not show up in our private@ mail list. If our mentors have the > responsibility to moderate the private list, why is it that none of our 5 > mentors have not forwarded it? Whether it is technically a bit-bucket or > not is irrelevant. If our mentors don't moderate the list and forward an > important email such as a committer invite, it is effectively a > bit-bucket! So our candidate is sitting waiting for the next steps and is > hearing nothing! That is unacceptable.
Not all mentors are moderators. I am not. These three are moderators. chenliang...@apache.org <https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/ppmc/committer/chenliang613>, kam...@apache.org <https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/ppmc/committer/kamaci>, k...@apache.org <https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/ppmc/committer/kenn> The information is here: https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/ppmc/datasketches > > WRT: Being a committer enables you to more easily make changes without > needing to go through the patch submission process. --- (A ill-advised > implication) > > That's a fair point, but not all projects follow this pattern. In >> addition, the template is free to be modified by each project, you're under >> no obligation to follow the published format verbatim; so if your project >> chooses to invite someone and wants to reword the text you can. >> > > I recognize that these templates can be changed by the user. But you are > missing my point. Why start with a recommendation that is ill-advised to > start with? Many folks simply copy these templates making as few changes > as possible without reading the content and thinking about the > implications. And I have proof of this happening with senior ASF folks. > > I am a bit puzzled why you are pushing back so hard on my recommendations. > I am a great fan of the ASF and I just want to improve the documentation > and make it better! > > Regards, > Lee. > > > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 1:54 PM Dave Fisher <w...@apache.org> wrote: > >> >> >>> On Aug 4, 2020, at 1:31 PM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 4:19 PM leerho <lee...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Folks, >>>> >>>> It is our first time going through the recommended New Committer process >>>> and we have uncovered some significant problems with the documentation >>>> <https://community.apache.org/newcommitter.html#new-committer-process>. >>>> >>>> >>> First understand that this site (community.a.o) is maintained by comdev. >>> Podlings should be following the processes at >> http://incubator.apache.org/ >>> >>> >>>> - The most serious problem is step A: of the "Committer Invite >> Template" >>>> on the above page: >>>> >>>> A. This personal invitation is a chance for you to >>>>> accept or decline in private. Either way, please >>>>> let us know in reply to the [priv...@project.apache.org] >>>>> address only. >>>>> >>>>> This is a potential disaster, since the candidate will not have read or >>>> write privileges to the private mail list, the candidate's reply will >>>> simply disappear into the bit-bucket! I would recommend changing this >>>> paragraph to: >>>> >>>> A. Please reply directly to me if you wish to accept (or not accept) >> this >>>>> invitation. >>>> >>>> >>> No. Why do you think it will disappear into the "bit-bucket"? The >>> candidate would have the email in their inbox and would be able to >> archive >>> it/save it for reference however they choose fit. private mailing lists >>> may have moderation in place, but since it's a legitimate email the >>> moderators of the list should moderate it through if it does get >>> moderated. The acceptance should also be on the podling's private list >> to >>> allow the ASF to have a permanent record of the acceptance. >> >> I have moderated numerous such requests in the past. Usually within 24 >> hours, but occasionally within 104 hours. >> >> I have a Smart Mail filter to make sure that I see all moderation emails >> even though the vast majority are spam. >> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Presumably the person sending this message will be someone from the PMC >> / >>>> PPMC that the candidate already has had some contact with. Also, >> hopefully, >>>> the sender has enough good sense to not CC non-private mail lists or >> other >>>> people on the invite, which will make the exchange as private as >> possible. >>>> >>>> >>> Yes, the person sending the invite needs to be on the PMC/PPMC. >> Typically >>> this is done by whoever actually did the nomination but there is no >> formal >>> rule about who must or must not send it (in some TLPs I think they expect >>> the chair to do it, podlings don't have chairs). >> >> Typically a response is required in 30 days and the PPMC and Mentors will >> need to track the result. >> >> Sometimes a nominee has to ask their company if they can sign an ICLA and >> not every one can. >> >> Regards, >> Dave >> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> - The next problem is the wording of the first sentence of the >>>> 2nd paragraph: >>>> >>>> Being a committer enables you to more easily make >>>>> changes without needing to go through the patch >>>>> submission process. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> This is basically recommending bad programming practice! We encourage >> all >>>> our committers to use the PR and review process on all but the most >> trivial >>>> commits (e.g., documentation typos). I would recommend simplifying this >>>> sentence to: >>>> >>>> Being a committer grants you write access to the project repositories. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> That's a fair point, but not all projects follow this pattern. In >>> addition, the template is free to be modified by each project, you're >> under >>> no obligation to follow the published format verbatim; so if your project >>> chooses to invite someone and wants to reword the text you can. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> - This next issue is somewhat a matter of style, but I would recommend >>>> replacing the entire section "B" with: >>>> >>>> B. If you accept, you will receive a follow-up message with the next >> steps >>>>> for establishing you as a committer. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The above changes will make the invite letter simpler and more >>>> straightforward. >>>> >>>> >>> Once you've invited the person to be a committer, they should be able to >>> submit the ICLA on their own. Someone on the PMC/PPMC shouldn't need to >>> tell them how to do it, but the instructions included in B are pretty >> clear >>> and help that committer figure out how to submit the forms as needed. >>> >>> >>>> I would be happy to submit these changes as a PR but someone will have >> to >>>> tell me where to do this. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> >>>> Lee. >>>> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> >>
