incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Cliff Schmidt" <>
Subject Re: Re: Policy on Initial Committership
Date Fri, 06 Oct 2006 14:38:37 GMT
On 10/6/06, Niclas Hedhman <> wrote:
> If the Proposer controls the Proposal (and not stick it on a freely editable
> Wiki), then isn't it very straight forward?

+1, although I think a Wiki still *should* work if the established
etiquette was not to make edits to someone else's proposal

> You feel excluded (I have); Convince the Proposor that you belong.


> You feel "piling on" is happening; Ask the Proposer to qualify the selection
> criteria, and have a dialog if you find it "inappropriate".

+1, and the Champion should be the first one to bring up this topic
with the proposed initial committers, before the proposal even shows
up at Apache.

> I mean, who cares if "Company X" starts a podling in ASF Incubator with 400
> employees getting commit access to that project?

+1, I think it is a mistake to impose an artificial limit to the
number of people who can be initial committers from the same company
if each one of them is going to be spending a significant amount of
time working on the project.

> If we change the wording in Graduation Criteria to include "maximum 30% of
> committers from the same company", then that excessive initial PPMC on the
> Proposal quickly becomes a handicap.

I agree with the sentiment here, but we've been through the 50% rule
before and found it to have flaws.  There have been podlings that most
Incubator PMC members were quite happy with by the time the graduation
vote came around, but they consisted of >50% from the same employer.
We specifically dropped the 50% requirement about 2.5 years ago when
we saw that a podling was operating openly, transparently, and based
on merit; and, they had added a couple committers to further diversify
the group, but were having trouble finding more contributors with
consistent and valuable contributions to bring in as a committer.
They also didn't want to drastically drop the 'merit bar' for
committers just to meet some imposed percentage so they could graduate
(many ways to 'game the system' here).

What I believe we've found works best over the years is to consider
the entire behavior of the project over its incubation and raise
questions about any trends pushing it in the wrong direction.  We also
should consider any actual or perceived employer domination that is
either biasing project decisions or intimidating others from getting

I wish we could just have an objective list of numerical requirements,
but I think it has to come down to the judgement of the Incubator PMC

(not to say that I thought Niclas was advocating for a particular
numerical requirement right now -- I just wanted to agree with his
idea that employer domination can be considered at graduation, but
caution the use of hard numbers)


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

View raw message