| Re: [ee4j-community] Committers don't have to contribute code |
Send ee4j-community mailing list submissions to
ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j- community
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
ee4j-community-request@eclipse.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
ee4j-community-owner@eclipse.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of ee4j-community digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Committers don't have to contribute code (Wayne Beaton)
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 10:41:53 -0400
From: Wayne Beaton <wayne.beaton@eclipse-foundation.org >
To: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [ee4j-community] Committers don't have to contribute code
Message-ID:
<CALXWXwfZFKvmKb7ux2LYRfMop--H5W_iOvdVV6XcnsrEhWGpxQ@mail. >gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I'll confirm that there is *no rule* that says that a committer must
contribute code. In practice, project teams tend to election somebody as a
committer as a practical means of enabling them to directly push code,
accept pull requests, etc., but there is precedent for making somebody a
committer to acknowledge some other form of contribution.
While I have your attention...
Committers are expected to implement the Eclipse Development Process
<https://www.eclipse.org/projects/dev_process/ >development_process.php
(which describes the operation of our open source projects at a pretty
coarse-grained level; it's not a development methodology), and conform to
the Eclipse Intellectual Property Policy
<https://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/Eclipse_IP_Policy. > and engage in
the IP Due Diligence Process (e.g. all contributors must sign the Eclipse
Contributor Agreement <https://www.eclipse.org/legal/ECA.php > and sign-off
on their contributions). Note that we install hooks on all Eclipse
Foundation managed GitHub repositories to help committers know whether or
not a contributor has met these obligations.
There's more in the Eclipse Project Handbook
<https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#resources- >.eca
HTH,
Wayne
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 8:21 AM, Mike Croft <mike.croft@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Just to echo what Ivar Grimstad said:
>
>
> *1. I don't think that there is stated anywhere that a committer must
> commit code...*
>
>
> I've been a committer on the MicroProfile project since it became an
> Eclipse project and have never contributed code. I've contributed (a
> little) to documentation but my main contribution is on calls and the
> mailing list, so this hasn't been a restriction for me.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> *Mike Croft*
>
> Head of Support
>
> Payara Services Limited
>
>
>
> *Payara Server ? Robust. Reliable. Supported.*
> W: *www.payara.fish* <http://www.payara.fish/> | T: +44 207 754 0481 ; +1
> 415 523 0175 <(415)%20523-0175> | Twitter: *@Payara_Fish*
> <https://twitter.com/Payara_Fish >
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------------------------------------------------ ----
>
> Payara Services Limited, Unit 11, Malvern Hills Science Park, Geraldine
> Road, Malvern, Worcestershire, WR14 3SZ
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org <ee4j-community-bounces@
> eclipse.org> on behalf of Steve Millidge (Payara)
> <steve.millidge@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> *Sent:* 27 March 2018 09:51:24
> *To:* EE4J community discussions
>
> *Subject:* Re: [ee4j-community] Community Control was Jakarta EE logo
> selection
>
>
> Markus,
>
>
>
> An individual can contribute freely through the EE4J projects, they can
> raise issues, discuss on mailing lists, create PRs and contribute code. The
> projects are self governing and under the control of the group of
> committers that make up the project. Therefore if an individual wants to be
> involved in the technical direction of JakartaEE this is the way to do it.
> There are no fees to do this.
>
>
>
> An individual can then be elected to be a committer on a project by the
> existing group of committers for the project under the governance rules of
> the specific EE4J project. This gives them write access to the repositories
> associated with that project including website, wiki and other
> documentation etc. There are no fees to do this.
>
>
>
> An individual once a committer can become a committer member which is a
> formal individual membership of the Eclipse Foundation by signing the
> Eclipse Membership agreement. There are no fees to do this.
>
>
>
> Now if an individual wishes to get involved with the governance of the
> foundation itself rather than the projects. They are free to stand for
> elections for any committee of the Eclipse Foundation including a seat on
> the board. Board membership is a formal board seat with all the fiduciary
> and legal duties of a full Director of the foundation. There are no fees to
> do this.
>
>
>
> There are other classes of membership for corporations and these are all
> outlined here https://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/2018-01_Eclipse_
> MEMBERSHIP_AGMT.pdf with all their fee schedules, rights and
> responsibilities. Note there is not a ?Vendors? membership class. An
> individual can also lobby their employer to become a member of the Eclipse
> Foundation at one of these membership levels and pay some fees to the
> Eclipse Foundation and become their corporate representative.
>
>
>
> Payara and Tomitribe have joined the Eclipse Foundation as Strategic
> Members and have therefore paid these fees and acquired the
> responsibilities but we also gain the same rights as a big corporation
> paying much larger fees, this is laudable of the Eclipse Foundation.
>
>
>
> Payara are small and likely much smaller than the employers of many
> individual contributors. Many of those employers will use the outputs of
> the EE4J project and the open source ?vendors? for free while creating paid
> for software for their customers which is their right under the licenses.
> However Open Source software is not free to create.
>
>
>
> Mike and his team have a specific recruitment drive to get corporations
> who are large users of what will be JakartaEE technology to become members
> and contribute both money and time. Please encourage your employer to do
> the same.
>
>
>
> Steve
>
>
>
> *From:* ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org <ee4j-community-bounces@
> eclipse.org> *On Behalf Of *Markus KARG
> *Sent:* 26 March 2018 21:55
> *To:* 'EE4J community discussions' <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> *Subject:* Re: [ee4j-community] Community Control was Jakarta EE logo
> selection
>
>
>
> Ivar,
>
>
>
> you misunderstood me.
>
>
>
> 1. Individual contributors CANNOT become members FOR FREE. Only COMMITTERs
> can become members FOR FREE. Not every contributor is a committer, even if
> his input is very valueable for both, the projects and the EF as a whole.
> Only CODE-contributors can become commiters, but input is not always code.
> If I wouldn't be a JAX-RS committer, I wouldn't have a vote without
> payment, independent of my knowledge and history in Java EE.
>
>
>
> 2. AFAIK all commiters will share ONE seat, but I might be wrong here.
> Will the committers really have the same amount of seats as the paying
> vendors?
>
>
>
> BTW, I am already a committer member. Seems the PMC has no list of these?
>
>
>
> -Markus
>
>
>
> *From:* ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org [mailto:ee4j-community-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org >] *On Behalf Of *Ivar
> Grimstad
> *Sent:* Montag, 26. M?rz 2018 21:26
> *To:* EE4J community discussions
> *Subject:* Re: [ee4j-community] Community Control was Jakarta EE logo
> selection
>
>
>
> Markus,
>
>
>
> I think you are wrong on a couple of points here.
>
>
>
> 1. Individual contributors CAN become members. I, for example is an
> individual contributor and a Committer Member and it does not cost me a
> penny.
>
>
>
> 2. As a Committer member, I can run for election for the Steering-,
> Specification- and Marketing Committees of the Jakarta EE working group.
> Still without paying. And with the same rights as the paying Influencer-
> and Participant member companies. They also have to be elected.
>
>
>
> So, I encourage you to become a committer member (two docs to sign). It
> does not cost you anything other than the time you're already spending.
>
>
>
> Ivar
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 7:25 PM Markus KARG <markus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> Steve,
>
>
>
> you miss the point that individual contributos cannot become members, and
> that committer members do not have the same powers than paying members
> have. So what you actually express is simply a commitment to the
> pay-to-play rules of the EF, which is exactly what I dislike most with the
> EF. For me, the powers in the EF should get discoupled from the payments.
> In fact I am willing to donate money to the EF, but I am not willing to
> spend thousands of dollars just to gain the same rights.
>
>
>
> -Markus
>
>
>
> *From:* ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org [mailto:ee4j-community-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Steve Millidge (Payara)
> *Sent:* Montag, 26. M?rz 2018 12:40
> *To:* EE4J community discussions
> *Subject:* Re: [ee4j-community] Community Control was Jakarta EE logo
> selection
>
>
>
> ?The Community? is a broad constituency and I don?t think any of us would
> claim to speak for the whole of the community.
>
>
>
> Saying that I feel I have to speak up for the Eclipse Foundation here.
>
>
>
> The Eclipse Foundation is a small approx. $6M annual budget
> https://www.eclipse.org/org/foundation/reports/annual_ , notreport.php
> for profit, member supported organisation. There are many classes of
> membership open to both corporations, not for profits; vendors; end-users
> and individuals. The smallest fees for small companies is $1,500 per year
> to be a Solutions Member and $25,000 to be a Strategic Member with the same
> rights and representation as larger members. While these fees are not
> likely affordable for an individual, individual committers are still
> represented on the board and on the committees of the working group through
> committer elections. The Foundation?s governance is open
> https://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/ and ran by members in accordance
> with its constitution. The membership fees drive the work of the Foundation.
>
>
>
> Therefore if members of the community wish to make the rules and have
> control over the Eclipse Foundation and over JakartaEE the community is
> free to join the Eclipse Foundation, the JakartaEE WG and/or contribute to
> EE4J projects. I would encourage all out there that care passionately about
> Jakarta EE to get involved individually if you can. Alternatively if your
> employer is heavily dependent on JakartaEE technologies and wants control
> or influence over the Eclipse Foundation ask them to become members and
> participate.
>
>
>
> Saying all that EE4J projects are governed by the Eclipse Development
> Process https://www.eclipse.org/projects/dev_process/
> development_process.php through open source rules of engagement and there
> are no fees to join the individual projects, contribute, become a committer
> and drive the overall technical direction through contributions.
>
>
>
>
>
> Steve
>
>
>
> *From:* ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org <ee4j-community-bounces@
> eclipse.org> *On Behalf Of *Markus KARG
> *Sent:* 24 March 2018 07:24
> *To:* 'EE4J community discussions' <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> *Subject:* Re: [ee4j-community] Jakarta EE logo selection process - next
> steps
>
>
>
> Mike,
>
>
>
> thanks for clarification.
>
>
>
> I think we all would be happy if simply you could confirm that the
> marketing team did not do any kind of "preselection" by other criteria than
> just *legal* issues. In particular, they did not rule out logos due to
> personal taste, style, or design choice. Right?
>
>
>
> What the community expects is to have control over Jakarta EE (in the
> sense of making the rules for the EF, not the EF making the rules for the
> community). This includes that the EF asks the community *before* the EF
> acts. And with "community" I do not mean "only paying vendors" but also the
> majority of committers (even non-member committers).
>
>
>
> -Markus
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org [mailto:ee4j-community-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org >] *On Behalf Of *Mike
> Milinkovich
> *Sent:* Freitag, 23. M?rz 2018 22:31
> *To:* ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
> *Subject:* Re: [ee4j-community] Jakarta EE logo selection process - next
> steps
>
>
>
> On 2018-03-23 4:27 PM, Jason Greene wrote:
>
> I read that differently. My interpretation is: They just eliminated
> candidates that failed to meet the design criteria, which did include a
> basic legal component. The next step is a more thorough legal analysis as
> well as a brand review from the foundation?s marketing team. From that
> process they will pick the strongest contenders. Both of these functions
> are pretty standard (Also really important for major industry marks) and
> based on expertise & analysis, and while we all have some biases, I
> seriously doubt this is driven by simple personal preferences.
>
>
> This is correct. We removed the ones that did not meet the design criteria
> as stated in writing. This included removing the ones that we knew had
> legal issues. Now we are going to do more reviews, including deeper legal
> ones.
>
> The community will have an opportunity to select from a number of options.
>
>
>
> Is the concern more that there will be too few options and you guys might
> not like the options, or is it that there is some nefarious purpose? If
> it?s the latter what would they have to gain?
>
>
> On Mar 23, 2018, at 2:21 PM, Richard Monson-Haefel <rmonson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> Right. Some were removed for legal reasons but the rest was a subjective
> decision by the marketing team.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 2:17 PM, Markus KARG <markus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> I understood the original mail in a way that from all submissions the EF
> removed everything but left over only four due to a pre-selection by their
> *marketing* team (not *legal* team).
>
> -Markus
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org
> [mailto:ee4j-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx ] On Behalf Of Heiko W. Rupp
> Sent: Freitag, 23. M?rz 2018 20:07
> To: EE4J community discussions
> Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Jakarta EE logo selection process - next
> steps
>
> On 23 Mar 2018, at 18:35, Markus KARG wrote:
>
> > I second that. The EF should simply remove those logos which are
> > legally problematic, and then let the community vote for their
> > favorite. This is a community project, and
>
> Isn't that what
> | > * We will hold a community vote to determine which of these
> | > final candidate logos should be the chosen logo.
>
> says?
>
> I understand Paul that the EF needs to (to quote you) "remove those logos
> which are legally problematic", which is done by the marketing team, as
> they
> know this process of removal best.
>
> But then I may be wrong.
> Heiko
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ee4j-community mailing list
> ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
> from this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j- community
>
> --
>
> Java Champion, JCP EC/EG Member, EE4J PMC, JUG Leader
>
> _______________________________________________
> ee4j-community mailing list
> ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
> from this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j- community
>
>
--
Wayne Beaton
Director of Open Source Projects
The Eclipse Foundation
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/ee4j- >community/attachments/ 20180327/51e98b8e/attachment. html
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
ee4j-community mailing list
ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j- community
End of ee4j-community Digest, Vol 7, Issue 109
**********************************************