RE: [modeling-pmc] Committer nominations

["Kenn Hussey" <Kenn.Hussey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Title: Re: [modeling-pmc] Committer nominations

Given that TMF is a new project, has there even been enough time for contributions to have been made? If so, all we would need to do is list these individuals’ contributions (as Bjorn has suggested); committers necessarily have to be contributors before they can be committers, no?

 

Cheers,

 

Kenn Hussey
Program Manager, EA/Studio

Embarcadero Technologies, Inc. | www.embarcadero.com 
110 Spadina Avenue, Suite 400 | Toronto, ON  M5V 2K4
Kenn.Hussey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Mobile: 613-301-9105

From: modeling-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:modeling-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Richard Gronback
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 11:37 AM
To: PMC members mailing list; Bjorn Freeman-Benson
Subject: Re: [modeling-pmc] Committer nominations

 

I guess you just beat me to the reminder.  I asked Sven to provide more detail on his nominations just a minute ago (cc’d this list and yourself).

Best,
Rich


On 4/15/08 11:30 AM, "Bjorn Freeman-Benson" <bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Rich, Ed, other PMC members,
Lately I've noticed a number of very weak of Modeling committer nominations. For example:

---

modeling.tmf Committers,
Jan is a very experienced EMF/GMF/Eclipse developer, and is going to work full time
on Eclipse modeling technology at itemis in Kiel.

modeling.tmf.modeling.tmf.xtext Committers,
Dennis is an experienced Eclipse developer. He's working on the tooling
(i.e. editors, etc.) for Xtext as well as M2T/Xpand. He works at itemis
labs kiel.

modeling.tmf.modeling.tmf.xtext Committers,
Peter is a well-known MDSD-Expert and is working on the tooling (i.e.
editors, etc.) for Xtext as well as M2T/Xpand. He works at itemis labs
kiel.

modeling.tmf.modeling.tmf.xtext Committers,
Jan is an experienced eclipse developer. He has been using GMF and EMF for
a long time and will work on Xtext and other Eclipse technologies at itemis
labs kiel.

---

These nominations are nowhere near the required bar of explaining why these people should be committers. Worse, they appear to be saying "this person should be a committer because he works for us" - a justification that is explicitly disallowed (see http://www.eclipse.org/projects/dev_process/development_process.php#4_4_Project_Team "nor is it a right based on employment by an Eclipse Member company or any company employing existing committers"). Perhaps I'm just misreading the text but if I'm misreading it, then many/most Eclipse members are going to have the same misinterpretation.

Additionally, committer nominations are public records and are hints and indications of project quality from the project team to the larger Eclipse community. When an ecosystem member is considering consuming a project, they look at the public record around that project for indications of quality. Thus committer nominations must be written for that larger community and not just for the project team. Nominations must explain to outsiders why this person should be a committer - for example "Bob is a well-known expert" should include urls to places that Bob has contributed (and become well known). Nominations should include a list of patches the person has contributed to the project, articles, newsgroup posts, etc. (see http://www.eclipse.org/projects/dev_process/new-committer.php).

Please note that my criticism here is not related to these candidates qualifications - to be honest, the nominations are so brief that I can't tell if the candidates are qualified (and that's the problem, eh?). The candidates probably are qualified, but there needs to be public evidence of those qualifications.