Re: [DISCUSS] Criteria for PMC, committers

One concern I have about not bundling committer and PMC membership is that there is not much incentive to nominate someone to become a PMC member. When someone is an active contributor but not a committer it's visible in the fact that they have to ask others to merge their PRs, which also provides

Re: [DISCUSS] Criteria for PMC, committers

I think in any point of view we are looking at Committer or PMC membership, it does come down to merit. Does the person have the merit, which can also be trust, to be a Committer and/or PMC member? The difference between Committer and PMC member is not simply being 'gatekeepers' of the codebase, P

Re: [DISCUSS] Criteria for PMC, committers

I think it's a lot of what is under the contributing section, but I think it needs to be cleaned up. A lot of the what should be done is lost under the screen shots of things. I nice clear bullet point, with maybe links to the wiki for details, would be nice. If we collected all of this in the C

Re: [DISCUSS] Criteria for PMC, committers

Are you thinking in terms of something like this? https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Code+of+Conduct Or something more specific to coding tasks? Thanks, Anthony > On May 31, 2019, at 2:41 AM, Owen Nichols wrot

Re: [DISCUSS] Criteria for PMC, committers

@Owen Some interesting thoughts and proposals. None of which I think we could easily implement, but some that I would LOVE to have. I also apologize for restating many things that Helena has already said, but it is taking my a long time to craft this email... Jake has raised a concern that I

Re: [DISCUSS] Criteria for PMC, committers

I agree with Jake that the lack of guidelines is an issue that introduces our own biases. I don't think this means that we need to change our process, but rather that we need to formalize it. If a -1 vote requires a justification, then we need to have expectations defined. It's a lot harder to argu

Re: [DISCUSS] Criteria for PMC, committers

I appreciate the concern about bias/cronyism. If having some criteria will “level the playing field”, then let’s discuss what those criteria would be. However, in voting for a committer, a single -1 carries more weight than all the +1’s in the world. A -1 also requires explanation. This syste

Re: [DISCUSS] Criteria for PMC, committers

The major concern I have with voting without guidelines is that this process has been vary biased towards fellow employees. Internal knowledge and trust is being used to evaluate each candidate. Some have had very little public interaction with the community as a whole. I think it's important th

Re: [DISCUSS] Criteria for PMC, committers

A 6-month waiting period from committer to PMC is tempting because it’s easy to implement, but as you described it yourself, it is arbitrary, which ultimately de-values what it means to be a member of the Geode PMC. The bottom of https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html explains why The Ap

Re: [DISCUSS] Criteria for PMC, committers

A few observations I have found by looking through the Apache wiki for all the projects is: That several of them do separate the two roles. The discussions about committers happens in the dev@ list while discussions for PMC happen on the private@ list. Some projects projects treat PMC as a promot

Re: [DISCUSS] Criteria for PMC, committers

I don’t see a compelling reason for Geode to make a distinction between committer and PMC member. If you have the power to merge PRs, you are a steward of the codebase; we need to be able to trust that you have Geode’s best interests at heart and will adhere to our practices. PMC membership c

Re: [DISCUSS] Criteria for PMC, committers

My two cents... 1) What is our criteria for becoming a committer and PMC member? I don't have anything particularly enlightening to say here, and I think I am just reinforcing what we already do, but here goes... I think this piece from the ASF notes is key for measuring candidacy for committer/P