incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sam Ruby <>
Subject Re: Updating PPMC rosters via whimsy
Date Sun, 11 Jun 2017 14:21:52 GMT
On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 7:58 AM, John D. Ament <> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 5:58 AM sebb <> wrote:
>> On 11 June 2017 at 00:18, Sam Ruby <> wrote:
>> > On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 6:10 PM, Sam Ruby <>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> For that reason, I'd like to make a simplifying assumption: that all
>> mentors
>> >> are PPMC members, and all PPMC members are committers.
>> >
>> > Existing records that violate one or more assumptions:
>> >
>> "Podling Committers that are not Incubator committers"
>> AFAIK, that should not happen.
>> Probably mostly existing ASF committers being added to podlings directly.
>> New committers should be added to Incubator + podling by the existing
>> processes.
>> I think it would make sense to just add them to the Incubator
>> committer list so they have the appropriate karma.
> Agreed.  I appreciate the concise report.  We should plan to add these
> individuals.

You should be able to add them from the ppmc page.

>> "Incubator committers that are not on the IPMC and are not listed as a
>> committer of any podling"
>> Most likely they were on podlings that are no longer active.
>> I don't think any cleanup of the list is done when podlings exit
>> incubation, so this list will continue growing.
>> Does that matter?
> I was thinking about this.  I think I mis-stated the behavior of adding
> someone to the PPMC.  There is no requirement to remove them from
> incubator.  That's actually how I got started, my podling already graduated
> but I still had my incubator commit bit.

Some of that list is because not all of the podling rosters have been updated.

But if the plan is to have a monotonically increasing list of people
who ever were associated with a podling at any point in the past, it
may make sense to change things so that all committers have access to
incubator resources and do away with this list.

> The list that does worry me is the list of mentors not on the IPMC.  I feel
> like that requires a bit more research to find out what happened but unless
> those people are members they're probably going to be removed from their
> mentor roles.  What do others think?

The individuals should probably be evaluated separately.  As Sebb
points out, most are ASF members, and therefore are one ask away from
being added to the IPMC:

- Sam Ruby

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message