[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [dsdp-pmc] RE: Process for Code Contributions / Feature Additions
- From: <mika.hoikkala@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2006 21:43:12 +0300
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Thread-index: AcaGbhnJ6yDQFIRvRlGjMZf5iiQlKAAAjthAADNOfiA=
- Thread-topic: [dsdp-pmc] RE: Process for Code Contributions / Feature Additions
>[mailto:dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ext Gaff, Doug
>Sent: 02 June, 2006 21:15
>To: Bjorn Freeman-Benson; Oberhuber, Martin; DSDP PMC list
>Subject: [dsdp-pmc] RE: Process for Code Contributions /
>I'm also ok with that interpretation in the cases below.
>My request is that anything a single PMC member approves MUST
>be copied to dsdp-pmc so the rest of the group is aware.
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Bjorn Freeman-Benson [mailto:bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 1:58 PM
>> To: Oberhuber, Martin; Gaff, Doug
>> Subject: Re: Process for Code Contributions / Feature Additions
>> Martin, Doug,
>> My view is that each PMC member represents the consensus of
>> PMC and thus a single PMC member's approval is sufficient. Of course,
>> does mean that you need to be careful who you put on the PMC :-)
>> Oberhuber, Martin wrote:
>> > Dear PMC & EMO,
>> > After we had some confusion over what was needed in order
>> > a new code contribution into our project repositories (single PMC
>> > member approval, or vote among the PMC), Doug Gaff asked
>me to check
>> > and inform you. So here's what I found.
>> > * The standard toplevel project charter (which also applies for
>> > says:
>> > arter_v1.0.php
>> > "The Development Projecess"
>> > "[...] The Committers of a Project or component decide which
>> > may
>> > be committed to the master code base of a Project or component
>> > respectively.
>> > The PMC defines the decision process, but that process must
>> > the
>> > ability for Committers to veto the change. [...] Common
>> > processes
>> > include:
>> > * Retroactive - changes are proactively made by Committers but
>> > vetoed by a single Committer.
>> > * Proactive [...]
>> > * Thre Positive [...]"
>> > It looks like this mostly applies to code changes done by
>> > and it looks like most of us are using this first (retroactive)
>> > i.e. let committers just do their work and veto it later if they
>> > not like it. Would you agree that this should be our process?
>> > * The Contribution Questionnaire says:
>> > "[...] for any significant contribution of content to be
>> > an Eclipse project. Prior to completing this Questionnaire, the
>> > Committer
>> > should have technical agreement from the PMC that the
>new code is
>> > required.
>> > [...] please provide the contact info of the PMC member who has
>> > approval for this contribution"
>> > So the question is what "The PMC" means in this context. The form
>> > to imply that a single member's approval is sufficient. For TM,
>> > had to go through this process for 3 contributions now,
>with more to
>> > follow since IBM has more code to contribute that was
>> > joining the TM project and has not been put into the initial
>> > contribution.
>> > Would you agree that a single PMC member's approval is sufficient?
>> > * The Committer Guidelines also say:
>> > http://www.eclipse.org/legal/committerguidelines.php
>> > "All content submitted through any channel other than the Eclipse
>> > Foundation website must be approved by the PMC, and submitted to
>> > the EMO, via the Contribution Questionnaire, for due diligence
>> > approval,
>> > prior to being committed to the CVS repository. [...]
>> > performed by the PMC is usually one of a purely
>> > Again, it is not clear whether "the PMC" is a single PMC
>member or a
>> > vote among all PMC members.
>> > My personal feeling is, that a single PMC member's approval should
>> > be sufficient in order to keep the process smooth -- in
>> > it's only one of the PMC members who has sufficient technical
>> > into the particular area of contribution anyways.
>> > Comments?
>> > Thoughts?
>> > Thanks,
>> > Martin
>> > --
>> > Dipl.-Ing. Martin Oberhuber
>> > Member of Technical Staff Phone (UTC +1h): +43 (662)
>> > Wind River Systems (Salzburg) GmbH Fax: +43 (662)
>> > Jakob-Haringer-Str.8, A-5020 Salzburg, Austria
>> > ----------------------- How Smart Things Think
>dsdp-pmc mailing list