Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
RE: [] What's the process fornominating a new member?

This is just subtly different than what you have listed, but for me the prime consideration for AC membership has always been: Is there a demonstrable track record of contributions to the community. We have lots of really smart technical people at Eclipse who are perfectly happy doing a great job on the one project that they are working on. I think the AC needs to be looking for people who are willing to go beyond their silo and make contributions to the community and to other projects.


From: [] On Behalf Of Oberhuber, Martin
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:01 PM
Subject: RE: [] What's the process fornominating a new member?


Hi Brian,


this is in fact in interesting question. Though I'd think I'd rephrase the question:

   "What are expected qualifications for a proposed appointed AC member?"


Since I don't think the process is unclear (just go ahead and propose somebody

on the mailing list), but it's unclear whether the candidate you have in mind would

meet some criteria which we perhaps feel instinctively but haven't anywhere

written down.


I'll try to start a discussion with what I feel, and I think that once we reach some
consensus this should be documented on the Wiki:

  • Mentorship. AC members may be pulled in as Mentors. Therefore, they should have some experience in Eclipse project leadership and a good understanding of the Eclipse Development Process and IP Policy. They should also be "linked in" to the Community such that they know whom to ask in case they cannot answer a question for a project that they might eventually be mentoring... though becoming an AC member should make a great stride towards getting "linked in".
  • Time and Passion. New AC members should not get dormant immediately. Since the work of the AC is in order to improve the Eclipse Ecosystem as a whole for the benefit of all the projects, they should have some passion for that Ecosystem and be willing to invest some time for that (I've mentioned 4 hours each month as a minimum before).
  • Public Track of Contributions. AC membership is considered the highest level of Meritocracy. Therefore, proposed AC members should have some public track of records which shows, how they have helped the Eclipse Development process or ecosystem before. I'm thinking of mailing list / newsgroup answers, blog posts, FAQs, discussion contributions, and bugzilla bugs on the "Community" category.
  • Authority. We'll want the AC to be perceived as a body of authority. Therefore I think that also AC members should be perceived as persons of authority in the domains that they come from. They should be "known" to the Community in good standing thanks to the contributions that they have made before. To me, "Authority" also conveys that AC members should show technical (software development) excellence in their respective areas, such that they are welcome as discussion partners for architectural questions.

As I'm writing this down, I acutally notice some similarity to the new committer election process: people can help / contribute to the AC work by bugzilla comments, blogs, etc even if they are not members of the AC. Dave Carver, for instance, has been contributing a lot. After some contributions they can be voted in. Ideally, not only appointed members should meet these criteria, but also those representing a PMC or strategic member (though we cannot influence this, so officially the criteria should only apply for appointed members).


Once somebody can think of a proper candidate, we might first have an informal unrecorded poll [1] what others think, in order to protect people's privacy. Next, I think it's good to ask that candidate whether she would be willing to join the AC -- it should mean some time commitment, so joining the AC or not is not a natural no-brainer and might require candidates to check with their employers for acceptance. Candidates may feel honored to get asked even if they are not finally appointed for whatever reason, so asking them first seems right. Once that is clear, the candidate can be proposed on the mailing list, we collect comments or votes and then recommend her to Mike for appointment.


Does that make sense? What do others think?


[1] Bjorn on not always being too open,




Martin Oberhuber, Senior Member of Technical Staff, Wind River

Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member




From: [] On Behalf Of brian.fitzpatrick@xxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 11:25 PM
Subject: [] What's the process fornominating a new member?

Hi all

Sorry to spam the list with this question, but figured it was better to ask publicly in case other people were wondering the same thing.

Is there a process for nominating a new member to the architecture council? I'd like to nominate one of the DTP PMC members to join. She's got the experience and the passion to fuel a number of healthy discussions among the group and I think she'd be a great addition.

Thanks in advance

Brian Fitzpatrick
Eclipse Data Tools Platform PMC Chair
Eclipse Data Tools Platform Connectivity Team Lead
Staff Software Engineer, Sybase, Inc.

Back to the top