openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton" <>
Subject RE: [DISCUSS] Rules of voting for new committers and PPMC members
Date Thu, 14 Jun 2012 05:35:54 GMT
For pootle, it is possible for there to be anonymous submissions.  That is not acceptable for

If there's a way of registering on pootle, just as for bugzilla and wiki, etc., then identified
people could register and submit changes for pootle.  But it might be necessary for a committer
to apply those contributions.  That would then be another case where a regular and reliable
contributor to pootle might be invited to be a committer.

Although there is only one kind of committer, committers are trusted to not make changes in
areas where they are not expert enough.  Many committers make contributions for review before
commitment in areas where they are not (yet) expert.  

I think a simple test is whether or not a regular contributor is often making requests for
committers to review something and commit it and the committers see that the contributions
are reliable.

This might not apply in every case.  I think it is important to account for how it applies
when considering the eligibility of a contributor to becoming a committer.

I don't think the criteria change because there is a perceived shortage of (active) committers.

 - Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: [] On Behalf Of Yong Lin Ma
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 21:59
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Rules of voting for new committers and PPMC members

I agree with you except I don't undertand the pootle part. I did read
it quite a few times...

Share something in CC (something similar as SVN). source files are
managed in different groupes. Like source code, testing script, id
files. People only apply for rights they need.

The committer rights here carry a lot. It would be very helpful if
someone can list it out.

For example:
Update source code (including id files, testing script, build script..)
Update website
Can confirm a bug in BZ
Can edit bugs in BZ
anything else?

I also understand why it ends up in this way. I think it is nature for
Apache projects before.

Bug AOO is too big and needs much more contributors than other projects.

We also trust committers who have no idea how the AOO codes works
won't mess things up because they would never bother to change the

On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 11:06 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton
<> wrote:
> I only know the principle by example.
> I think some of the web pages about contributors and what having someone become a committer
illustrate this.  For example, the common case is where a productive contributor can stop
submitting patches for others to review and commit by being invited to be a committer and
now able to contribute to the code base directly.
> Contributing bug reports or contributing on a wiki does not require so much.  But processing
bug reports and administering the wiki would, since it would then not be necessary to request
that others do it.
> If there is a way to register for pootle to submit translation materials, but not directly
incorporate the material, that would be a place where committer karma would be valuable in
support of regular contributors.
> Those are the cases that occur to me.
>  - Dennis
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [] On Behalf Of Yong Lin Ma
> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 19:18
> To:;
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Rules of voting for new committers and PPMC members
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 2:08 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton
> <> wrote:
>> I just realized that there is a principle around the election of committers that
may have been lost sight of.
> Where can I find the principle in detail?
>> Here is something to consider:
>> The classical case for someone becoming a committer is that they can more-easily
do something they are already doing.  The usual example: instead of submitting patches that
have to be reviewed and committed by someone else, a committer is empowered to apply patches
directly to the SVN.
> Becoming a committer also means more responsibility and more self-government.
> Just to developer, if you already get committer rights, I urge you to
> get your work reviewed by someone else if possible before getting it
> into SVN.
>> The Apache OpenOffice project also has need for committers in conjunction with governance
responsibilities (such as oversight of the Community Forums) or infrastructure work (e.g.,
administering the MediaWiki server) and being on the PMC for supporting confidential matters
(including ooo-security) and having accountability for oversight.
>> In looking at someone whose contributions are clear, the next question is, I think,
where do they fit in the above picture?  If being a committer (or a PPMC member) is inessential
to the work being done, it seems inappropriate to confer committer privileges.  I think neither
PPMC (next: PMC) membership nor committer status should be viewed as ceremonial achievements.
>>  - Dennis
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [] On Behalf Of Yong Lin Ma
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 22:50
>> To:
>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Rules of voting for new committers and PPMC members
>> A specific question. What is the criteria for a QE member to become a committer?
>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 4:50 AM, Dave Fisher <> wrote:
>>> On Jun 4, 2012, at 12:21 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Dave Fisher <>
>>>>> On Jun 4, 2012, at 1:34 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 9:28 PM, Dave Fisher <>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>> On Jun 3, 2012, at 5:18 PM, Kay Schenk <>
>>>>>>>> On 06/03/2012 11:48 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>>>>>>> FWIW,
>>>>>>>>> The Foundation Roles are explained here:
>>>>>>>> yes, this is standard ASF policy.
>>>>>>>> My question/concern at this point would be --
>>>>>>>> how well do we think this works for Apache OpenOffice?
>>>>>>> The PPMC has had the practice of making Committers into PPMC
members on
>>>>> the same VOTE. This is the practice for some Apache projects, but not
>>>>> I think that from now on this project should always have separate votes
>>>>> a matter of policy.
>>>>>>> What do others think?
>>>>>> If we agree that committer and PMC are different roles with different
>>>>>> criteria, then I think that is the natural outcome.
>>>>>> But it will depend on the individual.   Consider three types of
>>>>> contributors:
>>>>>> -- experienced contributor, but new to Apache
>>>>>> -- new to the project entirely, but experienced with Apache from
>>>>>> another Apache project, perhaps already a PMC member in another
>>>>>> project
>>>>>> - new both to OpenOffice and to Apache
>>>>>> Based on prior experience it might be easier/faster to demonstrate
>>>>>> necessary skills these roles.  In the first category, the experienced
>>>>>> OOo contributor, I'd expect they could be make a committer quickly,
>>>>>> but will take time to learn about The Apache Way.  But in the other
>>>>>> categories they might already have that knowledge (in the 2nd case),
>>>>>> or develop it concurrently as they learn about the code over a longer
>>>>>> period of time,
>>>>>> But in principle I think we should be distinguishing this roles.
>>>>> Let's discuss (2) since now that the project is bootstrapped those in
>>>>> category (1) will be quickly recognized and (3) is the usual case.
>>>> Well I do have a concern about (1). In fact, given the ecosystem here, with
>>>> the amount of "paths" one might take to participate, I wonder if we miss
>>>> participation in some arenas.
>>> We certainly will.
>>>> I guess the only thing we can hope for in this respect is that a current
>>>> PPMC member (or two) has  their fingers in several areas.
>>> It is important for all committers and PMC members to identify and encourage
contributors. The PMC should keep a "watch" list of contributors who look likely. Committers
can send suggestions to ooo-private along with the areas of contribution and interested PMC
members can look for sustained effort.
>>>> A discussion for another time perhaps.
>>> Yes.
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave
>>>>> Consider
>>>>> (a) Committers on another project.
>>>>> (b) PMC members on another project.
>>>>> None of these people expect to automatically be granted roles on another
>>>>> Apache project. They expect that they will earn merit, but like the prior
>>>>>, experience will show. This is why it can be a good idea
>>>>> a project to add experienced Apache committers / PMC members to the
>>>>> "Initial Committer" list.
>>>>> On Jun 3, 2012, at 7:30 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>> If there were a way to make people members of the
>>>>>> (P)PMC without making them committers I am sure that
>>>>>> would be used a lot but it would seem meritocratically
>>>>>> incorrect to bring into the PPMC people that are not
>>>>>> committers but not offer the same opportunity to
>>>>>> committers by default.
>>>>> Keep it simple. So Committer first and then (P)PMC. Think of concentric
>>>>> circles with code being on one sector, but with many other sectors that
>>>>> differ from project to project.
>>>> definitely +1 on this.
>>>> Committers first...
>>>>> If the (P)PMC decides someone needs to be both then I think we'll need
>>>>> hold sequential votes. Again to avoid complications.
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Dave
>>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Dave
>>>>>>>>> Pretty much in line to what you are thinking.
>>>>>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>>>>> --- Dom 3/6/12, Yong Lin Ma<>
 ha scritto:
>>>>>>>>>> This was a discussion about rules of
>>>>>>>>>> voting for new committer and PPMC
>>>>>>>>>> member. We think it is more appropriate to let all
>>>>>>>>>> contributors get
>>>>>>>>>> involved in this. So I moved the discussion to ooo-dev.
>>>>>>>>>> General process about voting in a new committer and
>>>>>>>>>> member is here
>>>>>>>>>> By far the practice is most candidates were voted
>>>>>>>>>> committer and
>>>>>>>>>> PPMC member at the same time.
>>>>>>>>>> And no concreate critrial defined in public for AOO.
>>>>>>>>>> Your comments are welcomed.
>>>>>>>>>> A comment from Rob:
>>>>>>>>>>> If it were entirely up to me I'd have it be like:
>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Contributor -- anyone who contributes to the
>>>>>>>>>> mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> discussions, patches, translations, bug reports,
>>>>>>>>>> support.� This
>>>>>>>>>> comes in all flavors and sizes.� We need to do
a better
>>>>>>>>>> job giving
>>>>>>>>>> them credit and acknowledging their contributions.�
>>>>>>>>>> the feeling is
>>>>>>>>>> that someone is not valued unless they are voted
in as a
>>>>>>>>>> PPMC member,
>>>>>>>>>> then we're doing something wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Committer -- The threshold question:� Do
>>>>>>>>>> trust their judgement
>>>>>>>>>> with respect to the area of their contributions?�
>>>>>>>>>> move from
>>>>>>>>>> contributor to committer is a move from RTC (patches
must be
>>>>>>>>>> reviewed)
>>>>>>>>>> to CTR.� So we really need to have a sense that
>>>>>>>>>> are doing quality
>>>>>>>>>> work.� Committers also have veto rights on all
of our
>>>>>>>>>> commits.� So we
>>>>>>>>>> need to trust their judgement.
>>>>>>>>>>> 3) PMC member -- The threshold question:� Do
>>>>>>>>>> understand The
>>>>>>>>>> Apache Way and our community-based decision making?
>>>>>>>>>> average are
>>>>>>>>>> they solving more community problems than they are
>>>>>>>>>> causing?� Are they
>>>>>>>>>> helping others in the community succeed?� When
>>>>>>>>>> graduate, and our
>>>>>>>>>> Mentors move on to other podlings, the PMC collectively
>>>>>>>>>> needs to
>>>>>>>>>> mentor new members to the project.� So I think
the PMC
>>>>>>>>>> is more about
>>>>>>>>>> trusting their community skills rather than their
>>>>>>>>>> skills.
>>>>>>>>>>> It might be possible for someone to qualify for
2 and 3
>>>>>>>>>> at the same
>>>>>>>>>> time.� But probably not in every case.
>>>>>>>>>>> Note:� This is not how we have operated
>>>>>>>>>> previously.� I think there was
>>>>>>>>>> an bootstrapping issue where we needed to have a
>>>>>>>>>> suitably large
>>>>>>>>>> and diverse to provide balance.� We also obviously
>>>>>>>>>> started with a PPMC
>>>>>>>>>> consisting of people who did not fully understand
>>>>>>>>>> Apache.� That is the
>>>>>>>>>> nature of Incubation.� But I don't think this approach
>>>>>>>>>> is necessarily
>>>>>>>>>> something we should continue with a year later, as
>>>>>>>>>> approach
>>>>>>>>>> graduation.
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> MzK
>>>>>>>> "So let it rock, let it roll
>>>>>>>> Let the bible belt come and save my soul
>>>>>>>> Hold on to sixteen as long as you can
>>>>>>>> Changes come around real soon make us woman and men."
>>>>>>>>         -- "Jack and Diane", John Mellencamp
>>>> --
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> MzK
>>>> "So let it rock, let it roll
>>>> Let the bible belt come and save my soul
>>>> Hold on to sixteen as long as you can
>>>> Changes come around real soon make us woman and men."
>>>>                               -- "Jack and Diane", John Mellencamp

View raw message