incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John D. Ament" <>
Subject Re: PPMC voting new committers
Date Sun, 05 Nov 2017 02:37:20 GMT
I'm of the opinion that if there isn't something broken, we should try to
change it.  Likewise, if there's a process in place that works well for
TLP's I'm extremely hesitant to make something incubator specific.

At the same time, I've seen the process break the way Craig's described.
Coaching on list helps fix it.  For instance, a podling I was mentoring was
voting to add a new committer.  It seemed partially coaxed by a mentor,
however when I looked at what that person had done, it was 2 failed PR's
(content changes targeting the wrong repo, where that repo is seemingly
auto-generated from the source repository), an email asking how he can
contribute, and two bug reports.  One bug report did have a testcase fix
(it was trivial, forcing locale into a consistent value).  It's the kind of
thing that makes me wary of the below email.  I decided to not weigh in
since a mentor had already voted +1, the guy seemed to be participating,
granted still at a nascent level.

I do think it would be good if we had more solidified processes for voting
in committers.  I agree with Craig's note, voting in a committer shouldn't
be lazy consensus.  Maybe we want to incubator guides with some
recommendations but I do feel strongly it shouldn't become policy to
require mentors to vote to add a committer.


On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 9:58 PM Roman Shaposhnik <>

> I'm of two minds on this: on one hand, in the beginning of the
> incubation process something
> like this certainly makes sense. Yet, towards the graduation we should
> really encourage
> the PPMC to behave more like a TLP PMC.  As such they should have an
> option NOT to
> follow these somewhat arbitrary rules but instead come up with the
> rules of their own
> (within the foundation policy and doctrine of course).
> Not sure how to reconcile these two aspects.
> Thanks,
> Roman.
> On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Craig Russell <>
> wrote:
> > I'd like to see a change in incubator policy w.r.t. voting new
> committers.
> >
> > While there are no Foundation policies on how to vote new committers, we
> do have best practices documented in
> that explicitly calls for
> consensus approval of at least three positive votes and no vetoes.
> >
> > Applying this to the incubator, it makes sense to me to change the
> incubator policy to require a vote (no lazy consensus) and at least three
> PPMC votes in favor. I'd also add a requirement for at least one Mentor
> vote in favor.
> >
> > After graduation, communities might feel that they know better and can
> adopt bylaws that are different from the community best practices. But
> while in incubation I think that we should enforce best practice.
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > Craig L Russell
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > For additional commands, e-mail:
> >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message