Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [ee4j-community] Committers don't have to contribute code
Mike/Wayne,

Thanks for jointly answering that.
Not sure, if a JUG with official members who are registered with that entity and show up regularly would count? Otherwise it is probably just employees like both of you are at Eclipse Foundation.

The funny thing is, that while some projects are still at the JCP, this seems perfectly fine there:
https://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=382

To my knowledge neither Mark nor Emily are permanent employees of Eclipse Foundation Inc, yet they both represent it as Spec Lead Organization being committer members only.

Werner


On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 6:44 PM, <ee4j-community-request@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
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. Re: Committers don't have to contribute code (Werner Keil)
   2. Re: Committers don't have to contribute code (Mike Milinkovich)
   3. Re: Committers don't have to contribute code (Wayne Beaton)
   4. Re: Committers don't have to contribute code (Markus KARG)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 18:11:20 +0200
From: Werner Keil <werner.keil@xxxxxxxxx>
To: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Committers don't have to contribute code
Message-ID:
        <CAAGawe0cHoSdwOhweQ6JRF1d6Hat6iNmA+tUOPz7Afei8ReHAQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

So short answer, a JUG like LJC is not a legal entity, therefore cannot
have committers or show up in the mentioned stats?

Werner


On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 6:00 PM, <ee4j-community-request@eclipse.org> wrote:

> 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. Re: Committers don't have to contribute code (Wayne Beaton)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 11:20:46 -0400
> From: Wayne Beaton <wayne.beaton@eclipse-foundation.org>
> To: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Committers don't have to contribute code
> Message-ID:
>         <CALXWXwespttQMqpMtpxYUq7ETjUSYg99iMiyR=DaEKRujLTQog@mail.
> gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> You need to be a legal entity to be a member of the Eclipse Foundation.
>
> A company is a legal entity. There are several membership levels for
> companies, I recommend that you use the contact information on the page
> that you referenced if you have further questions.
>
> A committer, being a person, is also a legal entity and can join as a
> committer member.
>
> Wayne
>
> P.S. I believe the accepted protocol when responding to a list digest is to
> trim away the content that is not relevant to the thread you're responding
> to.
>
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 2:44 PM, Werner Keil <werner.keil@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> > Wayne,
> >
> > The most important question is, whether "company" can only be corporate
> > entities like Ltd., PLC, etc. or the  non-for-profit organizations,
> > standards bodies, universities, research institutes, media and
> publishing,
> > government and other organization types as defined by the Eclipse
> > Foundation board of directors (https://www.eclipse.org/
> > membership/become_a_member/membershipTypes.php) also qualify if they
> join
> > as Solutions Members for 5000$ per year?
> >
> > I understand, a JUG that has no formal incorporation and membership
> > registry could have a hard time regarding IP, but those that are
> registered
> > non-for-profit organizations, could they show up there, too if their
> > members commit code?
> >
> > Werner
> >
> >
> --
> 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/
> 20180328/c59b99b0/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 134
> **********************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/private/ee4j-community/attachments/20180328/15266b4f/attachment.html>

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 12:19:44 -0400
From: Mike Milinkovich <mike.milinkovich@eclipse-foundation.org>
To: ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Committers don't have to contribute code
Message-ID:
        <25ad965c-a697-8ca2-585a-8dacf220c5b0@eclipse-foundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed

On 2018-03-28 12:11 PM, Werner Keil wrote:
> So short answer, a JUG like LJC is not a legal entity, therefore
> cannot have committers or show up in the mentioned stats?

Incorrect.

The LJC is a legal entity, and is already a member of the Eclipse
Foundation. As is SouJava. Some JUGs are legal entities, some are not.

Now whether it would make sense for committers to claim that they work
for the LJC is a different story. Someone like Martijn Verburg is an
officer of LJC, so that would be fine. Some person who shows up a LJC
meetups but has no formal affiliation with the LJC legal entity would
almost certainly not be able to claim that their contributions were
coming from the LJC.

--
Mike Milinkovich
mike.milinkovich@eclipse-foundation.org
(m) +1.613.220.3223



------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 12:24:03 -0400
From: Wayne Beaton <wayne.beaton@eclipse-foundation.org>
To: EE4J community discussions <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Committers don't have to contribute code
Message-ID:
        <CALXWXwegkMDod2eRF4+P+rtm=+kLkYubN_0fAEWM=VzkGgAVgw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

I am unaware of the legal status of LJC.

Members of the LJC can be committers if they are elected into the position
like anybody else. Any commit activity from those committers will be
attributed to the member company with which they are affiliated, if any. We
have no mechanism for specifying other affiliations.

HTH,

Wayne

On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 12:11 PM, Werner Keil <werner.keil@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> So short answer, a JUG like LJC is not a legal entity, therefore cannot
> have committers or show up in the mentioned stats?
>
> Werner
>

--
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/20180328/bbdc6e23/attachment.html>

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 18:43:57 +0200
From: "Markus KARG" <markus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "'EE4J community discussions'" <ee4j-community@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Committers don't have to contribute code
Message-ID: <00ce01d3c6b3$fb1465e0$f13d31a0$@eu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Wayne,



thanks a lot for this explanation.



You might want to filter out the "glassfishbot".



Thanks

-Markus



From: ee4j-community-bounces@eclipse.org [mailto:ee4j-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Wayne Beaton
Sent: Dienstag, 27. M?rz 2018 20:13
To: EE4J community discussions
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Committers don't have to contribute code



Company logos show up on project pages when:

*       The company is a member of the Eclipse Foundation;
*       The company has provided their logo to the Eclipse Foundation; and
*       At least one employee of the company is a committer on the project and has pushed at least one commit into any branch of any project repository in the last three months.

So yes. If you want your company logo to appear on a project page, you need to have a committer that actually pushes commits. Note listing a committer as an "Also-by" entry in a Git Commit <https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#resources-commit>  counts (make sure that you get the email address right). So a committer can give credit to a collaborator when pushing a commit.



The process that builds the chart data only knows what it finds in the Git repository, so some "bot" users will appear. I can filter them out if I know about them. I'll see what I can do about the "genie" users. Similar to logos, only member companies show up in the charts. "Contributor" groups non-committer contributors together; "Unaffiliated" groups together those committers who do not work for a member company.



I'm not sure what you're asking with your last statement. The charts and the list of companies is generated exclusively by the criteria that I've set above. Having your company logo/name appear on a project page is a benefit of membership with the Eclipse Foundation (independent of any working group affiliation).



FWIW, developers need to earn their way to committer status on a project by demonstrating merit <https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#elections-committer> . Employment status or employer affilication is not an accepted criterion for becoming a committer (nor is a change in affiliation a reason to retire a committer).



HTH,


Wayne









On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 11:04 AM, Werner Keil <werner.keil@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Wayne,



They don't, but if an organization wants to show up under https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/ee4j

next to Oracle, Red Hat or IBM, they probably might like to ;-)



Similar stats for MicroProfile: https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/technology.microprofile/who show, that between 25 and 40% (not sure, if the "microprofile-genie" bot is included in the 40.5% "Contributor" or 5% "Unaffiliated") are committers and contributors who don't work for a big company.



Would it be possible to filter those bots out also from the individual diagram?



Those of us with long JCP background know, JUGs were not allowed to contribute directly to a JSR while it could join the EC. Is that similar here, meaning, all bigger JUGs like SouJava or LJC could buy with a Strategic Membership is a few extra seats in various working groups and boards or similar bodies, or could such a Strategic Member also have committers on their behalf and would therefore show up under "Active Member Companies" assuming their members are active of course?



Thanks,

Werner





--

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/20180328/4701dd5c/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 135
**********************************************

Back to the top