Ed,
Have you or committers on the project attempted to contact Radomil?
I've taken the position in the past (for EMF core for example) that
anyone not voting in a committer election would be decommiterized,
and have followed up on that premise with exactly that action. It's
not as drastic or severe as it sounds, or is it final. It's easy
for the committers to add someone back in should they choose to
become active again. We simply can't have important processes held
up because of inactivity. Yes it's nice to be a committer on a
project, but if even just voting is not possible, the level of
involvement simply doesn't merit committer status.
Regards,
Ed
On 25/05/2012 5:39 AM, Wayne Beaton wrote:
Here's what I think we should do.
The PMC should attempt to contact Radomil and ask his intentions
regarding the project.
If he is unresponsive, or responds that he wants to give up the
position, the PMC can declare the project dysfunctional and
request that the EMO replace Sergey with you for project lead. If
he responds otherwise, I have some other thoughts.
The EDP says that the decision to replace a project lead requires
the unanimous consent of the PMC. We generally regard this to mean
"no -1s" on a public vote in the PMC mailing list.
Once you are project lead, you retire the two inactive committers
and initiate a committer election for yourself. Sergey will have
to vote +1 in this election or it will fail. Once he does vote +1,
the election will wrap up immediately and you'll be provisioned.
If Sergey doesn't respond, I have some other thoughts.
Does this plan sound evil enough, or do I need to include sharks
with frickin' lasers?
Wayne
On 05/23/2012 03:03 PM, Ed Willink wrote:
Hi Wayne
Booting QVTo has bad ripples because GMF and more downstream
projects depend on it.
At about M3.5 there was a major email exchange when it appeared
that QVTo would not be in Juno.
As a result, Nicolas Rouquette (JPL/Nasa) personally funded
Sergey Boyko the sole remaining fractionally active committer to
get it into Juno. M4 happened but little else. Minimal email
response. One Bugzilla comment a few days ago.
So, on the one hand, Nicolas is being short changed in not
getting what he funded/agreed to fund.
On the other, I want QVTo to stay on the train and will do the
relevant builds/IP logs etc. Very little to do I suspect.
To expedite this, I need to be a QVTo committer.
About six weeks ago Sergey agreed that it would be a good idea
if he moved up to project lead, and I became a committer. I am
qualified to be a committer since about six QVTo plugins were
developed by me.
With Sergey being so inactive, perhaps I should be bumped direct
to project lead.
Regards
Ed Willink
On 23/05/2012 19:53, Wayne Beaton wrote:
The project metadata needs to be updated, and project activity
seems pretty quiet.
There is no evidence of builds of QVT Operational since the
Indigo release.
My assessment is that QVT operational should be booted from
the simultaneous release. But that's up to the Planning
Council due to lack of engagement in the process.
I'll send a note.
Wayne
On 05/23/2012 06:49 AM, Ed Willink wrote:
Hi
For MMT projects, I hope that ATL will be efficient, but I
fear that QVTo may need 'encouragement'. Can you please let
me know the current state of play?
Regards
Ed Willink
--
Wayne Beaton
The Eclipse Foundation
Twitter: @waynebeaton
Explore Eclipse Projects
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2176 / Virus Database: 2425/5017 - Release
Date: 05/23/12
--
Wayne Beaton
The Eclipse Foundation
Twitter: @waynebeaton
Explore Eclipse Projects
|