Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
[tools-pmc] Some comments on recent nomination/vote in EDT project

I case any of you on the Tools PMC do not follow the edt-dev list, I wanted to forward these comments I made there (pasted below).

I approved the nomination, but think it could have included more detail about a "history of contributions".

I am sure we would all agree that a "history of contributions" is important, and also that we as the PMC don't need to be too stern or strict, if there's no complaints or objections from committers. So, my comments were mostly to "set the tone" and expectations for future nominations.

Let me know if anyone disagrees with my advice, but mostly wanted to forward it here, to be sure we were all relatively consistent.


----- Forwarded by David M Williams/Raleigh/IBM on 10/19/2011 02:13 AM -----

From: David M Williams/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
To: EGL Development Tools <edt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 10/19/2011 02:08 AM
Subject: Re: [edt-dev] Committer vote for Theresa Ramsey has concluded successfully ... some comments from your friendly PMC
Sent by: edt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

EDT Committers,

I do plan to give my PMC vote and think Theresa will be a great committer ... but ... I think this is a good opportunity for me to comment on the nomination and process to make sure future expectations are clear.

The nomination was not as detailed as we'd normally like to see. It said, basically, only that "
Theresa will be taking over ownership of the EDT website".

Normally, we'd like to see some description that shows a history of contributions before someone becomes a committer. Granted, committership is primarily up to the committers, but, normally, they should base their judgement on a public, demonstrated history of contributions, usually in the form of patches, or attachments to bugs, but can also include design documents, newsgroup participation, wiki pages, etc. I suspect maybe it was felt "its only the website" ... but, still, access is access, and any committership should have at least some history.

The reason the Eclipse rules were set up this was was to avoid mere "positions" that would change based on employment, or assigned responsibilities from employers, but instead be determined based on publically demonstrated abilities and commitment to the project while working with the other committers, in the open. For easy reference, I'll include some links:

I certainly have no doubts about Theresa's abilities or commitment to the project, but it was not documented in the nomination. I did go to the trouble to search bugzilla and found 8 or 10 bugs that Theresa had commented on, beginning in September, so perhaps that is enough "history of contributions"? Even if so, no one should have to guess and it should be documented in the nomination. So, in the future, please be sure to include a good "history of contributions" or at least, state why there isn't one.

I want to emphasize that I do not have any concerns at all with this specific case, but thought it the perfect case to comment on. I did not want to leave the impression that "history of contributions" did not matter and am hoping a friendly reminder now would help avoid more complicated situations in the future.

I hope this advise helpful. I don't mean to "burden" the process ... I know, it's hard enough as it is.

Thank you all very much for your contributions to Eclipse and EDT.

Inactive hide details for portal-noreply---10/19/2011 12:03:58 AM---tools.edt Committers, This automatically generated message portal-noreply---10/19/2011 12:03:58 AM---tools.edt Committers, This automatically generated message marks the successful completion of

portal-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxx (portal on behalf of Matt Heitz)
10/19/2011 12:03 AM
[edt-dev] Committer vote for Theresa Ramsey has concluded successfully
Sent by:

tools.edt Committers,
This automatically generated message marks the successful completion of
voting for Theresa Ramsey to receive full Committer status on the tools.edt
project. The next step is for the PMC to approve this vote, followed by the
EMO processing the paperwork and provisioning the account.

Vote summary: 7/0/0 with 13 not voting
 ?  Aaron Allsbrook
+1  Tony Chen
 ?  Alice Connors
 ?  Jeffrey Douglas
 ?  Scott Greer
 ?  Paul Harmon
+1  Matt Heitz
+1  Jiyong Huang
 ?  Lisa Lasher
+1  Ben Margolis
 ?  Jing Qian
 ?  Jon Shavor
 ?  Will Smythe
+1  Justin Spadea
 ?  Brian Svihovec
 ?  John Trevisan (ClearBlade)
 ?  Bart Van Campenhout
+1  Joseph Vincens
 ?  Tim W Wilson
+1  Zhi Zhu

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact your project
lead, PMC member, or the EMO <emo@xxxxxxxxxxx>

edt-dev mailing list

edt-dev mailing list

Back to the top