| Re: [adoptium-pmc] Adding committers to Eclipse Temurin Compliance. |
> It would also be reasonable (owing to the special nature of Eclipse Temurin Compliance) to cite contributions to other Adoptium projects.Personally I don't think that's necessary for this project. Temurin Compliance is always going to be special and that's not because the members particularly want it to be so, but because of the legal agreements we have around mandating that it is handled differently and the regular, timeboxed nature of the work carried out inside it. Whether I knew them personally or not, I honestly cannot personally envisage a situation (maybe if we had too many? That would be nice ...) where I would vote against anyone eligible from joining the temurin compliance effort, which is critical to our releases so extra hands should always be warmly welcomed. The time, and mental drain, required on the part of the people completing the work in Temurin Compliance, particularly now that we'll be doing four releases in parallel next month, is really quite high. Since the people who can join are already restricted by the agreements I would trust that if another eligible company, for example Microsoft, had chosen to submit that person as a member they would be a suitable candidate and would trust that decision. Also in mind that unlike a normal open-source repository, everything related to Temurin Compliance is private and you have to be a contributor before you can attempt to do anything in it, making prior contributions to that area before joining impossible as you cannot just submit a PR or do any work in there until you're accepted in, so IMHO the bar should ideally be as low as possible subject TO the legal agreements of the project. I'm happy to rubber stamp additions from other companies, but be aware that's what it will be for the reasons above. TL;DR I'll pretty much take anyone ;-)To provide a concrete example I don't think Cynthia or Ivy contribute elsewhere else at Adoptium, but their contributions - unique to the Temurin Compliance project - are very much valued, and I'd heartily welcome others joining in a comparable limited capacity whether I already knew them or not (In fact I'd be delighted if we were able to have more companies join the Temurin Compliance agreements and submit people to do the same and help out particularly for some of our secondary platforms to reduce delivery times, but that's a separate discussion).Regards,Stewart...--_______________________________________________On Thu, 17 Mar 2022 at 18:05, EMO EMO <emo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Sorry for the long delay in following up.My primary concern is that getting the EMO to bypass the election process to appoint committers actually adds more steps to the process and adds some latency as we work through our work queue. On the other hand, running a proper election takes a week (or until every committer votes +1), so maybe the latency isn't so bad...As an experiment, I've set the "dev" list for the Eclipse Temurin Compliance project to point to the adoptium-pmc list, thinking that we might give that a try. My thinking is that it is highly unlikely that this list will be mistakenly used for discussion that should not be public. The wrinkle is that in order for this list to be useful as a means of notifying Eclipse Temurin Compliance committers that they need to vote, committers need to be subscribers to this list. I'm thinking that they should all probably already be subscribers, so maybe this isn't a limitation...Anyway, the usual committer election stuff should just work with this configuration.We do need to take care to ensure that the contents of the nomination statement is acceptable in a public archive.FWIW, IMHO the first sentence in this nomination statement is sufficient for the Eclipse Temurin Compliance project:Stephanie Crater is a software engineer working in Martijn's Java Engineering Group at Microsoft. She is our lead for the Alpine backport from Java 17 to Java 11 and Java 8 (for Eclipse Temruin and upstream at OpenJDK).In order to prove/complete her work we're requesting access to the Temurin Compliance group so she can run and debug TCK tests and ensure those ports are compatible.It would also be reasonable (owing to the special nature of Eclipse Temurin Compliance) to cite contributions to other Adoptium projects.I'm thinking that you try this the next time that you have to add somebody to the project to see how it goes and we adjust.Thoughts?WayneOn Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 4:29 PM Shelley Lambert <slambert@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:Hi all,For adding committers to Temurin-compliance, the project leads (myself, George Adams and Stewart Addison) are all in agreement. This is a special project that does not quite follow the same process as other Eclipse projects due to its nature. On the recent topic of adding Stephanie Crater and Jason Ren from Microsoft (a company that has signed the 3-way agreement) and Jie Kang from Red Hat (the other company that has signed the 3-way agreement), as all three are known to at least most of the other committers in the project and have been selected due to their abilities, validity and value to contribute, I am happy for us to proceed.By way of an unofficial vote, the Temurin-compliance committers had a discussion in the private Slack channel with no dissenting objections.If there is anything else needed from our end, please let us know.Regards,Shelley_______________________________________________On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 5:24 AM Martijn Verburg <martijnverburg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:Hi all,Happy new year!I'm not sure we go to a resolution on this one - would be good for more folks to chime in I think.Cheers,
Martijn_______________________________________________On Thu, 2 Dec 2021 at 10:06, Martijn Verburg <martijnverburg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:Hi Wayne,Thanks for raising these great questions! I'll add my thoughts inline below.On Wed, 1 Dec 2021 at 18:32, Wayne Beaton <wayne.beaton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Greetings PMC.I'd like your help to figure out the right approach for adding committers to the Temurin Compliance project. Normally, a developer establishes merit with a project before being nominated and elected to the committer role. But on Temurin Compliance, everything is private so there is no way to establish merit in any direct way.My strong preference is that we stick to the normal way as much as possible and use the election process to add committers to this project. To be frank, we're a small team and every exception that we make to the usual processes adds up. But more than that, while this project is basically closed, I'd really like the project to operate in as much of an "open and transparent" manner as possible.Agreed on the election, this is the one group to be super careful with.Is it the case that we should reasonably expect to be able to make some sort of statement of merit for committers that get added? That is, will it generally be the case that the people who get elected to the Temurin Compliance project will be recognised as experts in their field or that there will be contributions to a different Adoptium project or public discussion that a committer can use as a citation of merit?Yes, I think this is reasonable. So in my proposed case for Stephanie it would be something like:Stephanie Crater is a software engineer working in Martijn's Java Engineering Group at Microsoft. She is our lead for the Alpine backport from Java 17 to Java 11 and Java 8 (for Eclipse Temruin and upstream at OpenJDK). In order to prove/complete her work we're requesting access to the Temurin Compliance group so she can run and debug TCK tests and ensure those ports are compatible.Can it be reasonably expected that new committers to the Eclipse Temurin project are known to the existing committers? That is, can we reasonably expect that committers will actually cast an affirmative vote?Yes this is very reasonable. They need to be part of a company that's signed the 3-way agreement as well.Or is it the case that we need the ability to have the PMC just appoint individuals who are unknown to the other project committers and be done with it?That the project does not have a "dev" list is stopping us from using the regular election infrastructure. We opted to not create a dev list for the project to avoid a case where a committer mistakenly uses that list to discuss matters that cannot be discussed in a public forum. I'm thinking that a workaround is to create a mailing list with a name that makes it as obvious as possible that it is intended only for matters of governance, e.g., temurin-compliance-public-governance@xxxxxxxxxxx or similar. Does that make sense?I think it does and perhaps messages could be moderated so that an Eclipse member reviews before releasing?Cheers,Martijn_______________________________________________--
WayneWayne Beaton
Director of Open Source Projects | Eclipse Foundation
adoptium-pmc mailing list
adoptium-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/adoptium-pmc
adoptium-pmc mailing list
adoptium-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/adoptium-pmc
adoptium-pmc mailing list
adoptium-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/adoptium-pmc
--_______________________________________________The Eclipse Management Organization | Eclipse Foundation
adoptium-pmc mailing list
adoptium-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/adoptium-pmc
adoptium-pmc mailing list
adoptium-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/adoptium-pmc