openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Yong Lin Ma <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Rules of voting for new committers and PPMC members
Date Mon, 04 Jun 2012 03:33:47 GMT
PMC Member
"A PMC member is a developer or a committer that was elected due to
merit for the evolution of the project and demonstration of
commitment. They have write access to the code repository, an mail address, the right to vote for the community-related
decisions and the right to propose an active user for committership.
The PMC as a whole is the entity that controls the project, nobody

According to this, a committer has every rights to become a PMC member
unless he or she not willing to get involve in it.

We may separate the votes but it will just prolong the process. Or
simple make PMC member a commiter+. Understanding how Apache works is
must. But that is not rocket science, and shouldn't be a hurdle.

We also can never know in advance who will cause more trouble than help.

We should also encourage people reasigning from PMC if he or she is
not interested in it anymore.

On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:48 AM, Pedro Giffuni <> wrote:
> The Foundation Roles are explained here:
> 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 PPMC
>> member is here
>> By far the practice is most candidates were voted for
>> 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 project,
>> mailing list
>> discussions, patches, translations, bug reports, doc,
>> support.  This
>> comes in all flavors and sizes.  We need to do a better
>> job giving
>> them credit and acknowledging their contributions.  If
>> 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 we
>> trust their judgement
>> with respect to the area of their contributions?  The
>> 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 they
>> 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 they
>> understand The
>> Apache Way and our community-based decision making? On
>> average are
>> they solving more community problems than they are
>> causing?  Are they
>> helping others in the community succeed?  When we
>> 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 technical
>> 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 PPMC
>> 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 we
>> approach
>> graduation.

View raw message