PPMC voting new committers

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

PPMC voting new committers

Craig Russell-3
I'd like to see a change in incubator policy w.r.t. voting new committers.

While there are no Foundation policies on how to vote new committers, we do have best practices documented in http://community.apache.org/newcommitter.html that explicitly calls for consensus approval of at least three positive votes and no vetoes.

Applying this to the incubator, it makes sense to me to change the incubator policy to require a vote (no lazy consensus) and at least three PPMC votes in favor. I'd also add a requirement for at least one Mentor vote in favor.

After graduation, communities might feel that they know better and can adopt bylaws that are different from the community best practices. But while in incubation I think that we should enforce best practice.

Craig

Craig L Russell
[hidden email]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PPMC voting new committers

Jean-Baptiste Onofré
Hi

It sounds good to me. It's a good idea.

Regards
JB

On Nov 3, 2017, 18:34, at 18:34, Craig Russell <[hidden email]> wrote:

>I'd like to see a change in incubator policy w.r.t. voting new
>committers.
>
>While there are no Foundation policies on how to vote new committers,
>we do have best practices documented in
>http://community.apache.org/newcommitter.html that explicitly calls for
>consensus approval of at least three positive votes and no vetoes.
>
>Applying this to the incubator, it makes sense to me to change the
>incubator policy to require a vote (no lazy consensus) and at least
>three PPMC votes in favor. I'd also add a requirement for at least one
>Mentor vote in favor.
>
>After graduation, communities might feel that they know better and can
>adopt bylaws that are different from the community best practices. But
>while in incubation I think that we should enforce best practice.
>
>Craig
>
>Craig L Russell
>[hidden email]
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PPMC voting new committers

Roman Shaposhnik
In reply to this post by Craig Russell-3
I'm of two minds on this: on one hand, in the beginning of the
incubation process something
like this certainly makes sense. Yet, towards the graduation we should
really encourage
the PPMC to behave more like a TLP PMC.  As such they should have an
option NOT to
follow these somewhat arbitrary rules but instead come up with the
rules of their own
(within the foundation policy and doctrine of course).

Not sure how to reconcile these two aspects.

Thanks,
Roman.

On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Craig Russell <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'd like to see a change in incubator policy w.r.t. voting new committers.
>
> While there are no Foundation policies on how to vote new committers, we do have best practices documented in http://community.apache.org/newcommitter.html that explicitly calls for consensus approval of at least three positive votes and no vetoes.
>
> Applying this to the incubator, it makes sense to me to change the incubator policy to require a vote (no lazy consensus) and at least three PPMC votes in favor. I'd also add a requirement for at least one Mentor vote in favor.
>
> After graduation, communities might feel that they know better and can adopt bylaws that are different from the community best practices. But while in incubation I think that we should enforce best practice.
>
> Craig
>
> Craig L Russell
> [hidden email]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PPMC voting new committers

John D. Ament-2
I'm of the opinion that if there isn't something broken, we should try to
change it.  Likewise, if there's a process in place that works well for
TLP's I'm extremely hesitant to make something incubator specific.

At the same time, I've seen the process break the way Craig's described.
Coaching on list helps fix it.  For instance, a podling I was mentoring was
voting to add a new committer.  It seemed partially coaxed by a mentor,
however when I looked at what that person had done, it was 2 failed PR's
(content changes targeting the wrong repo, where that repo is seemingly
auto-generated from the source repository), an email asking how he can
contribute, and two bug reports.  One bug report did have a testcase fix
(it was trivial, forcing locale into a consistent value).  It's the kind of
thing that makes me wary of the below email.  I decided to not weigh in
since a mentor had already voted +1, the guy seemed to be participating,
granted still at a nascent level.

I do think it would be good if we had more solidified processes for voting
in committers.  I agree with Craig's note, voting in a committer shouldn't
be lazy consensus.  Maybe we want to incubator guides with some
recommendations but I do feel strongly it shouldn't become policy to
require mentors to vote to add a committer.

John

On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 9:58 PM Roman Shaposhnik <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> I'm of two minds on this: on one hand, in the beginning of the
> incubation process something
> like this certainly makes sense. Yet, towards the graduation we should
> really encourage
> the PPMC to behave more like a TLP PMC.  As such they should have an
> option NOT to
> follow these somewhat arbitrary rules but instead come up with the
> rules of their own
> (within the foundation policy and doctrine of course).
>
> Not sure how to reconcile these two aspects.
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>
> On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Craig Russell <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > I'd like to see a change in incubator policy w.r.t. voting new
> committers.
> >
> > While there are no Foundation policies on how to vote new committers, we
> do have best practices documented in
> http://community.apache.org/newcommitter.html that explicitly calls for
> consensus approval of at least three positive votes and no vetoes.
> >
> > Applying this to the incubator, it makes sense to me to change the
> incubator policy to require a vote (no lazy consensus) and at least three
> PPMC votes in favor. I'd also add a requirement for at least one Mentor
> vote in favor.
> >
> > After graduation, communities might feel that they know better and can
> adopt bylaws that are different from the community best practices. But
> while in incubation I think that we should enforce best practice.
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > Craig L Russell
> > [hidden email]
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: PPMC voting new committers

Henri Yandell-3
In reply to this post by Craig Russell-3
Scratching my head as I assumed it was a normal non-tech vote conducted on
the PPMC private list, majority wins, must be at least 3 votes. The one
'additional' rule I assumed was that the same must be true of PMC members
voting; effectively the PPMC vote needs to include 3 mentor +1s. If a vote
concludes with less than 3 PMC votes, it goes to the Incubator PMC private
list to fill in the necessary votes. As the project moves closer to
graduation, those mentor votes become more and more whackamole.

Guessing I'm out of date :) I didn't know we had PMCs that were adding
people via lazy consensus.

Hen


On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Craig Russell <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'd like to see a change in incubator policy w.r.t. voting new committers.
>
> While there are no Foundation policies on how to vote new committers, we
> do have best practices documented in http://community.apache.org/
> newcommitter.html that explicitly calls for consensus approval of at
> least three positive votes and no vetoes.
>
> Applying this to the incubator, it makes sense to me to change the
> incubator policy to require a vote (no lazy consensus) and at least three
> PPMC votes in favor. I'd also add a requirement for at least one Mentor
> vote in favor.
>
> After graduation, communities might feel that they know better and can
> adopt bylaws that are different from the community best practices. But
> while in incubation I think that we should enforce best practice.
>
> Craig
>
> Craig L Russell
> [hidden email]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>