[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
RE: [dsdp-pmc] PMC Meeting - Thursday August 7
|
I'm in agreement with Mark on this one. The
commitments should have some heft to them in terms of impact. Making three
changes to misspelled words or linking something in a plugin
manifest isn't exactly a quality contribution.
So says the man whose one code commit to date is a one-line
change to plugin.xml...
In practical terms, I don't see a lot
of people standing in line to be committers one way or the other. How does this
work in bigger projects? Do you have a lot of people who don't work for
the primary corporate sponsors making
a lot of contributions?
-E
I agree to defer to the project
committers on determining what makes for a quality contribution to a specific
project. However, I think our policy statement should give some guidance to the
projects regarding our expectation that the contributions be of some quality
rather than just some trivial thing done to check the box. So can we add the
word "quality" or "significant" in front of contribution?
Mark
"Gaff, Doug"
<doug.gaff@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
08/11/2008 08:37 AM
|
Please respond
to
DSDP PMC list
<dsdp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
|
To
| "DSDP PMC list"
<dsdp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
cc
|
|
|
Subject
| RE: [dsdp-pmc] PMC Meeting -
Thursday August 7 |
|
I like your suggestion Martin. Does anyone
else on the PMC have an opinion? Committer
Nominations must reference at least 3 publicly visible records of contribution. At least one of
these must be a patch in bugzilla on behalf of the nominating project.
From: dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Oberhuber, Martin
Sent: Friday, August 08, 2008
6:42 AM
To: DSDP PMC list
Subject: RE: [dsdp-pmc] PMC
Meeting - Thursday August 7 Hi all,
I don't think that quality of the contributions is really
relevant at this point, since
that's up to the project (and nominator) to decide. What counts for
me is openness, transparency, and
observing IP rules of engagement. Moreover, becoming a
committer is about committing Code, so at least one of these contributions should be some code which actually
made it into the code base and
thus shows that the contributor went through the IP process. Since Bugzilla is
the only allowed means of inbound contribution (yes, you cannot just copy & paste stuff from the mailing list
into CVS - see
Figure 11 on http://www.eclipse.org/legal/EclipseLegalProcessPoster.pdf
I'm in favor of requiring one
bugzilla. There's a corner case in Figure 2 of the Legal poster (contributors from same company under supervision of the pmc don't need
bugzilla). But since this corner
case is neither Open nor Transparent, I'm in favor of requiring bugzilla also in this case. All this being said, what about this wording: Committer Nominations must reference at least 3 publicly visible
records of
contribution. At least one of these must be a patch in bugzilla on behalf of the nominating
project.
References should be by means of
hyperlink (URL) for easy review, and can be mailing list, wiki or newsgroup contributions.
Cheers, -- Martin
Oberhuber, Senior Member of Technical Staff, Wind River Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm
From: dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Mark Rogalski
Sent: Friday, August 08, 2008 2:42
AM
To: DSDP PMC list
Cc: DSDP PMC list;
dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [dsdp-pmc] PMC Meeting -
Thursday August 7
I like it with the
following adjustments:
Candidate should have 3
good records of contribution: patches in bugzilla, good mailing
list, wiki or news group contributions. One contribution must be from the
nominating project.
"Gaff, Doug"
<doug.gaff@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by:
dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
08/07/2008 09:45 AM
|
Please respond to
DSDP
PMC list
<dsdp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
|
To
| "DSDP PMC list"
<dsdp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
cc
|
|
|
Subject
| RE: [dsdp-pmc] PMC Meeting - Thursday
August 7 |
|
Minutes updated. Thanks again for the progress on the project
plans.
Here is our proposal for future committer votes:
Propose 3 good records of contribution:
patches in bugzilla, good mailing list contributions. Ok if one of those records
is from another project.
Is this what we agreed to?
Action items:
Mark: Convert his eRCP plan slides to XML
format by end of August
All: Finish project plans by
Aug 31 so we can review in Sept meeting.
ALL: Complete the
drafts of Board Report by end of August. Word document.
Mark: Check with Uriel to see if he's going to submit a paper to
ESE.
Christian: Submit an ESE talk - could cover MTJ and
TmL or Eclipse in Mobile.
Dave: Submit an ESE
talk.
Doug: create the DSDP incubator and build the
initial website.
Dave: Contact Eclipse legal about best
terms of use for their vserver wiki.
From: dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gaff, Doug
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008
1:02 PM
To: DSDP PMC list
Subject: [dsdp-pmc] PMC Meeting -
Thursday August 7
Hi folks,
I’ve
updated the agenda for the meeting.
http://wiki.eclipse.org/DSDP/PMC/PMC_Minutes_7Aug08
Please
add anything else you’d like to talk about. If you cannot attend, please let the
group know.
The most important action item is a first draft of your
project plan to review prior to the meeting. Please link it in the portal so
that we can view them rendered, e.g.
http://www.eclipse.org/projects/project-plan.php?projectid=dsdp.tm
Doug_______________________________________________
dsdp-pmc mailing
list
dsdp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-pmc_______________________________________________
dsdp-pmc mailing
list
dsdp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-pmc
