Given the notion of "one project, one set of committers", I think we should do away with the notion of contrib committers for java-dev and just have everyone be committers.  Practically speaking, this would make all existing contrib committers be core committers.  I think the notion of contrib committers has added to the confusion about the status of contrib as well as acted like a "probation" for new committers.  To me, I don't think we should make that distinction, as has been evidenced time and time again, if we trust someone to commit to contrib, we can trust them to commit to core.  And if we don't trust them to contrib to core then we probably shouldn't contrib either.  Much of being a committer is about knowing what not to touch as it is to touch and I trust that all of our contrib committers know that.

Thoughts?

-Grant
---------------------------------------------------------------------

+1

Mike

On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Grant Ingersoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Given the notion of "one project, one set of committers", I think we should do away with the notion of contrib committers for java-dev and just have everyone be committers.  Practically speaking, this would make all existing contrib committers be core committers.  I think the notion of contrib committers has added to the confusion about the status of contrib as well as acted like a "probation" for new committers.  To me, I don't think we should make that distinction, as has been evidenced time and time again, if we trust someone to commit to contrib, we can trust them to commit to core.  And if we don't trust them to contrib to core then we probably shouldn't contrib either.  Much of being a committer is about knowing what not to touch as it is to touch and I trust that all of our contrib committers know that.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -Grant
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------

+1

On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 12:53 PM, Grant Ingersoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Given the notion of "one project, one set of committers", I think we should do away with the notion of contrib committers for java-dev and just have everyone be committers.  Practically speaking, this would make all existing contrib committers be core committers.  I think the notion of contrib committers has added to the confusion about the status of contrib as well as acted like a "probation" for new committers.  To me, I don't think we should make that distinction, as has been evidenced time and time again, if we trust someone to commit to contrib, we can trust them to commit to core.  And if we don't trust them to contrib to core then we probably shouldn't contrib either.  Much of being a committer is about knowing what not to touch as it is to touch and I trust that all of our contrib committers know that.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -Grant
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>

--
Robert Muir
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

---------------------------------------------------------------------

+1

  Michael

On 3/14/10 9:53 AM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
> Given the notion of "one project, one set of committers", I think we should do away with the notion of contrib committers for java-dev and just have everyone be committers.  Practically speaking, this would make all existing contrib committers be core committers.  I think the notion of contrib committers has added to the confusion about the status of contrib as well as acted like a "probation" for new committers.  To me, I don't think we should make that distinction, as has been evidenced time and time again, if we trust someone to commit to contrib, we can trust them to commit to core.  And if we don't trust them to contrib to core then we probably shouldn't contrib either.  Much of being a committer is about knowing what not to touch as it is to touch and I trust that all of our contrib committers know that.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -Grant
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>    
---------------------------------------------------------------------

This time a +1 without discuss :-)

-----
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Grant
> Ingersoll
> Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2010 5:54 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [DISCUSS] Do away with Contrib Committers and make core
> committers
>
> Given the notion of "one project, one set of committers", I think we
> should do away with the notion of contrib committers for java-dev and
> just have everyone be committers.  Practically speaking, this would
> make all existing contrib committers be core committers.  I think the
> notion of contrib committers has added to the confusion about the
> status of contrib as well as acted like a "probation" for new
> committers.  To me, I don't think we should make that distinction, as
> has been evidenced time and time again, if we trust someone to commit
> to contrib, we can trust them to commit to core.  And if we don't trust
> them to contrib to core then we probably shouldn't contrib either.
> Much of being a committer is about knowing what not to touch as it is
> to touch and I trust that all of our contrib committers know that.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -Grant
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

---------------------------------------------------------------------

On 2010-03-14 17:53, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
> Given the notion of "one project, one set of committers", I think we should do away with the notion of contrib committers for java-dev and just have everyone be committers.  Practically speaking, this would make all existing contrib committers be core committers.  I think the notion of contrib committers has added to the confusion about the status of contrib as well as acted like a "probation" for new committers.  To me, I don't think we should make that distinction, as has been evidenced time and time again, if we trust someone to commit to contrib, we can trust them to commit to core.  And if we don't trust them to contrib to core then we probably shouldn't contrib either.  Much of being a committer is about knowing what not to touch as it is to touch and I trust that all of our contrib committers know that.
+1.
--
Best regards,
Andrzej Bialecki     <><
  ___. ___ ___ ___ _ _   __________________________________
[__ || __|__/|__||\/|  Information Retrieval, Semantic Web
___|||__||  \|  ||  |  Embedded Unix, System Integration
http://www.sigram.com  Contact: info at sigram dot com
---------------------------------------------------------------------

: Subject: [DISCUSS] Do away with Contrib Committers and make core committers

+1
-Hoss
---------------------------------------------------------------------

On Mar 14, 2010, at 2:03 PM, Uwe Schindler wrote:

> This time a +1 without discuss :-)

Yeah, but Uwe, the thread was DISCUSS, not VOTE!  :-)  

>
> -----
> Uwe Schindler
> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
> http://www.thetaphi.de
> eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Grant
>> Ingersoll
>> Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2010 5:54 PM
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: [DISCUSS] Do away with Contrib Committers and make core
>> committers
>>
>> Given the notion of "one project, one set of committers", I think we
>> should do away with the notion of contrib committers for java-dev and
>> just have everyone be committers.  Practically speaking, this would
>> make all existing contrib committers be core committers.  I think the
>> notion of contrib committers has added to the confusion about the
>> status of contrib as well as acted like a "probation" for new
>> committers.  To me, I don't think we should make that distinction, as
>> has been evidenced time and time again, if we trust someone to commit
>> to contrib, we can trust them to commit to core.  And if we don't trust
>> them to contrib to core then we probably shouldn't contrib either.
>> Much of being a committer is about knowing what not to touch as it is
>> to touch and I trust that all of our contrib committers know that.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> -Grant
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>

--------------------------
Grant Ingersoll
http://www.lucidimagination.com/

Search the Lucene ecosystem using Solr/Lucene: http://www.lucidimagination.com/search
---------------------------------------------------------------------

On 03/14/2010 06:37 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
> On Mar 14, 2010, at 2:03 PM, Uwe Schindler wrote:
>
>    
>> This time a +1 without discuss :-)
>>      
> Yeah, but Uwe, the thread was DISCUSS, not VOTE!  :-)
>    

I had a whole spiel about earning merit, and some contrib committers
were made contrib committers for just a single contrib, some long ago,
didn't have to necessarily show they understood/followed the apache way,
lower bar (not necessarily from talent perspective, but you might be
made a contrib committer just to maintain the code module you
contributed, whether you worked with the community or not), etc, etc.
But ah, since everyone is into it without discussion, far be it from me
to stand against. And I got my spiel in (super condensed) anyway now.
With everyone else into it so far, I just look foolish trying to discuss :)

- Mark

>    
>> -----
>> Uwe Schindler
>> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
>> http://www.thetaphi.de
>> eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>>      
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Grant
>>> Ingersoll
>>> Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2010 5:54 PM
>>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> Subject: [DISCUSS] Do away with Contrib Committers and make core
>>> committers
>>>
>>> Given the notion of "one project, one set of committers", I think we
>>> should do away with the notion of contrib committers for java-dev and
>>> just have everyone be committers.  Practically speaking, this would
>>> make all existing contrib committers be core committers.  I think the
>>> notion of contrib committers has added to the confusion about the
>>> status of contrib as well as acted like a "probation" for new
>>> committers.  To me, I don't think we should make that distinction, as
>>> has been evidenced time and time again, if we trust someone to commit
>>> to contrib, we can trust them to commit to core.  And if we don't trust
>>> them to contrib to core then we probably shouldn't contrib either.
>>> Much of being a committer is about knowing what not to touch as it is
>>> to touch and I trust that all of our contrib committers know that.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> -Grant
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>        
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>      
> --------------------------
> Grant Ingersoll
> http://www.lucidimagination.com/
>
> Search the Lucene ecosystem using Solr/Lucene: http://www.lucidimagination.com/search
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>    
--
- Mark

http://www.lucidimagination.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------

On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Mark Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 03/14/2010 06:37 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 14, 2010, at 2:03 PM, Uwe Schindler wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> This time a +1 without discuss :-)
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, but Uwe, the thread was DISCUSS, not VOTE!  :-)
>>
>
> I had a whole spiel about earning merit, and some contrib committers were
> made contrib committers for just a single contrib, some long ago, didn't
> have to necessarily show they understood/followed the apache way, lower bar
> (not necessarily from talent perspective, but you might be made a contrib
> committer just to maintain the code module you contributed, whether you
> worked with the community or not), etc, etc.

Hmmm, yeah - when it is time to VOTE, there are actually two different
questions here:
1) if lucene should move away from contrib committers, adding no new ones
2) if all existing contrib committers should immediately become core
lucene/solr committers, or if that promotion should proceed in the
normal fashion as it has in the past.

-Yonik

---------------------------------------------------------------------

On Mar 14, 2010, at 8:25 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:

> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Mark Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 03/14/2010 06:37 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mar 14, 2010, at 2:03 PM, Uwe Schindler wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> This time a +1 without discuss :-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, but Uwe, the thread was DISCUSS, not VOTE!  :-)
>>>
>>
>> I had a whole spiel about earning merit, and some contrib committers were
>> made contrib committers for just a single contrib, some long ago, didn't
>> have to necessarily show they understood/followed the apache way, lower bar
>> (not necessarily from talent perspective, but you might be made a contrib
>> committer just to maintain the code module you contributed, whether you
>> worked with the community or not), etc, etc.
>
> Hmmm, yeah - when it is time to VOTE, there are actually two different
> questions here:

Agreed.

> 1) if lucene should move away from contrib committers, adding no new ones

Yes, this is what I'm thinking.  All future committers would be based on contributions to the project and there would be no distinction between contrib/core.

> 2) if all existing contrib committers should immediately become core
> lucene/solr committers, or if that promotion should proceed in the
> normal fashion as it has in the past.

I'm fine w/ all of them, except we might want to check to see if it has been more than a year of contributing and ask any of them if they want to be Emeritus.

-Grant
---------------------------------------------------------------------

On Mar 14, 2010, at 6:47 PM, Mark Miller wrote:

>
>
> On 03/14/2010 06:37 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>> On Mar 14, 2010, at 2:03 PM, Uwe Schindler wrote:
>>
>>  
>>> This time a +1 without discuss :-)
>>>    
>> Yeah, but Uwe, the thread was DISCUSS, not VOTE!  :-)
>>  
>
> I had a whole spiel about earning merit, and some contrib committers were made contrib committers for just a single contrib, some long ago, didn't have to necessarily show they understood/followed the apache way, lower bar (not necessarily from talent perspective, but you might be made a contrib committer just to maintain the code module you contributed, whether you worked with the community or not), etc, etc. But ah, since everyone is into it without discussion, far be it from me to stand against. And I got my spiel in (super condensed) anyway now. With everyone else into it so far, I just look foolish trying to discuss :)

Right, Mark.  I think we would be effectively raising the bar to some extent for what it takes to be a committer.  We'd also be making contrib a first class citizen (not that it ever wasn't, but some people have that perception).  Finally, I think we need to recognize that not everyone needs to be a McCandless in order to contribute in a helpful way.  I think sometimes we forget that you can do svn revert.  Obviously, we don't want to have to do it often, but it's not a huge deal if it happens.  We've all been there.

-Grant
---------------------------------------------------------------------

On 03/15/2010 08:33 AM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
> Right, Mark.  I think we would be effectively raising the bar to some extent for what it takes to be a committer.

That's part of my point though - some are contrib committers with a
lower bar - now they are core/solr committers with that lower bar, but
someone else that came along would not get to the same position now?

>   We'd also be making contrib a first class citizen (not that it ever wasn't, but some people have that perception).

I think because it was kind of true. I could come along before and
donate contrib x, and never show I worked well with the community or
build up the merit needed to be a committer, and be made a contrib
committer simply to maintain my module. That's happened plenty.

>   Finally, I think we need to recognize that not everyone needs to be a McCandless in order to contribute in a helpful way.

We obviously recognize that or else I wouldn't be here! I think its more
about fitting in - showing you get and follow the Apache way. Showing
that ideas and changes you might push are in line with what the other
committers thing is appropriate of a core/solr committer. Talent is not
key here - community is. The bar for this has been *much* higher core
than contrib in the past. And contrib has had different bars over time -
I think it was even lower in the past at points.

>   I think sometimes we forget that you can do svn revert.

I hate to have to do that. I don't think its a great way to handle this
- we could make everyone a committer at a drop of a hat and say we can
just revert. I wouldn't call for a revert except in exceptional
circumstances. I don't think that's the point.

> Obviously, we don't want to have to do it often, but it's not a huge deal if it happens.  We've all been there.
>
> -Grant
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>    

I also wouldn't personally cast my vote on this broadly - some people I
might think should be core/solr committers now, others not. Merit at
Apache is important - you never lose it. Seems weird to get something
like that so easily when in the past you had to work your way to it from
contrib committership and get voted on individually by the PMC.

Personally I'd prefer we just stop adding them, and the current ones
work their way up like normal if they are so inclined, or the ones that
are not even around anymore can just stay as they are.

--
- Mark

http://www.lucidimagination.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------

On Mar 15, 2010, at 1:25 PM, Mark Miller wrote:

> On 03/15/2010 08:33 AM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>> Right, Mark.  I think we would be effectively raising the bar to some extent for what it takes to be a committer.
>
> That's part of my point though - some are contrib committers with a lower bar - now they are core/solr committers with that lower bar, but someone else that came along would not get to the same position now?

I think they may just have a little more work to do, either that or maybe we just have a little more faith that the right things will be done.

>
>>  We'd also be making contrib a first class citizen (not that it ever wasn't, but some people have that perception).
>
> I think because it was kind of true. I could come along before and donate contrib x, and never show I worked well with the community or build up the merit needed to be a committer, and be made a contrib committer simply to maintain my module. That's happened plenty.

True.  I guess what I'm saying is we can still make them committers and it may be that they still only will work on "their" module, but we should base our vote on them being "full" committers.  I don't like the notion of modules belonging to someone (not that you were implying that, I know.)  I guess I just see it as you either have earned merit or not.  That's how we do it in Solr and Mahout and they both have modules/contribs and it also fits more with the notion of "one project, one set of committers".

>
>>  Finally, I think we need to recognize that not everyone needs to be a McCandless in order to contribute in a helpful way.
>
> We obviously recognize that or else I wouldn't be here! I think its more about fitting in - showing you get and follow the Apache way. Showing that ideas and changes you might push are in line with what the other committers thing is appropriate of a core/solr committer. Talent is not key here - community is. The bar for this has been *much* higher core than contrib in the past. And contrib has had different bars over time - I think it was even lower in the past at points.

Agreed.

>
>>  I think sometimes we forget that you can do svn revert.
>
> I hate to have to do that. I don't think its a great way to handle this - we could make everyone a committer at a drop of a hat and say we can just revert. I wouldn't call for a revert except in exceptional circumstances. I don't think that's the point.

Right, obviously I wasn't implying we'd want to do it, but we can if it is absolutely necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

My 2 cents as one who has no aspirations of ever being a committer.

I think with the pending re-org of contrib and the value of contrib, it
doesn't make much sense to have the distinction between core and contrib
let alone for contributors.

Regarding the former low bar, either prune the list (voluntarily or
forcefully), prune individuals when they commit something they really,
really shouldn't have (e.g. no discussion, no consensus), or give
several opportunities to do right then prune.

But in any case, spell out the expectations and document it (perhaps in
the wiki).

I think it can work and there will be little if any problem with it.

-- DM

On 03/15/2010 02:33 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
> On Mar 15, 2010, at 1:25 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
>
>    
>> On 03/15/2010 08:33 AM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>>      
>>> Right, Mark.  I think we would be effectively raising the bar to some extent for what it takes to be a committer.
>>>        
>> That's part of my point though - some are contrib committers with a lower bar - now they are core/solr committers with that lower bar, but someone else that came along would not get to the same position now?
>>      
> I think they may just have a little more work to do, either that or maybe we just have a little more faith that the right things will be done.
>
>    
>>      
>>>   We'd also be making contrib a first class citizen (not that it ever wasn't, but some people have that perception).
>>>        
>> I think because it was kind of true. I could come along before and donate contrib x, and never show I worked well with the community or build up the merit needed to be a committer, and be made a contrib committer simply to maintain my module. That's happened plenty.
>>      
> True.  I guess what I'm saying is we can still make them committers and it may be that they still only will work on "their" module, but we should base our vote on them being "full" committers.  I don't like the notion of modules belonging to someone (not that you were implying that, I know.)  I guess I just see it as you either have earned merit or not.  That's how we do it in Solr and Mahout and they both have modules/contribs and it also fits more with the notion of "one project, one set of committers".
>
>    
>>      
>>>   Finally, I think we need to recognize that not everyone needs to be a McCandless in order to contribute in a helpful way.
>>>        
>> We obviously recognize that or else I wouldn't be here! I think its more about fitting in - showing you get and follow the Apache way. Showing that ideas and changes you might push are in line with what the other committers thing is appropriate of a core/solr committer. Talent is not key here - community is. The bar for this has been *much* higher core than contrib in the past. And contrib has had different bars over time - I think it was even lower in the past at points.
>>      
> Agreed.
>
>    
>>      
>>>   I think sometimes we forget that you can do svn revert.
>>>        
>> I hate to have to do that. I don't think its a great way to handle this - we could make everyone a committer at a drop of a hat and say we can just revert. I wouldn't call for a revert except in exceptional circumstances. I don't think that's the point.
>>      
> Right, obviously I wasn't implying we'd want to do it, but we can if it is absolutely necessary.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>    
---------------------------------------------------------------------

>
> Personally I'd prefer we just stop adding them, and the current ones work
> their way up like normal if they are so inclined, or the ones that are not
> even around anymore can just stay as they are.
>

This seems reasonable to me.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 10:54 PM, Ryan McKinley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Personally I'd prefer we just stop adding them, and the current ones work
>> their way up like normal if they are so inclined, or the ones that are not
>> even around anymore can just stay as they are.
>>
That sounds reasonable to me too. Yet, we should still make sure
contrib committers are able to commit to the new "modules" or whatever
we going to decide where contrib stuff ends up. It seems to be odd if
I'd not be able to commit to the analyzers anymore because they have
moved out of contrib into something new.

simon
>
> This seems reasonable to me.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------