Got it. I will inform the partners correspondingly.Currently, no additional CQ is required for Fatih’s PR (just some ongoing refactoring). I will then restart the nominations as soon as more data on the merit statement is available than just a PR (are merged LOCs an appropriate metric? I know fixed bugs, newsgroup postings, dev-list discussions, or wiki-pages are).
Best regards, Robert
P.S.: In case the original post was lost, I was replying to:
Hi everyone,
I have a bit of a problem with approving the two Kuksa committer elections. Looking at the Eclipse Project Handbook [1] I think that both nominations lack the information of why the projects trusts the committer candidates.
My understanding, reading the nomination criteria, is that the reason for nomination, is the fact they opened a PR, which isn't even merged yet. And right after that, the nomination was opened.
So if the project defines "trust" by simply opening a PR, then I think this is not the right way to elect new committers. As every contributor, opening a PR, would have the same right to become a committer on the project.
If they both had been forgotten in the initial contributors list, then that would be different story. In that case it would make sense to be to let us know if anyone else had been forgotten, so that the initial contributor list can be updated.
Cheers
Jens
The initial committers list is part of the project proposal and creation process. Including names in the initial committers list serves as the committer election for those initial committers. That process is now complete, so it would be inappropriate to change that list.
New committers should be added to a project via committer election. The employment status of a developer cannot be a factor in an election. Do not include employer information in the merit statement for a committer election.
Is a CQ required for Fatih's contribution?
Wayne
Hi everyone,
sorry for this late reply. Alexios and Fatih are indeed partners of the publicly funded research project. By the time of submitting the Eclipse Kuksa project proposal, it was not clear that they will contribute - but now it is. Fatih’s PR is not merged yet, since I had to submit several CQs for his contribution such as CQ17378, CQ17379, CQ17386, CQ17390, CQ17394, CQ17397, and more. There is a minor json handling refactoring ongoing currently, that will certainly be followed by the merge process soon.
During our latest Eclipse Kuksa discussions, the partner koçsistem informed me about three developers that are implementing a direct-access API for the project. Hence, having them within the initial contributors list would also be beneficial:
To the best of my knowledge, there are no additional project developers currently.
If it is possible to include Alexios, Fatih, and the three above mentioned developers to the initial contributors list, I would appreciate if this list can be updated accordingly. Otherwise, please inform me, and I could try to quantify the nominee's contributions as soon as those are merged and provide a more detailed outline of why we trust the nominees.
Sorry for the *follow-up* efforts.
Thanks and best regards, Robert
iot-pmc mailing list
iot-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/iot-pmc
-- Wayne Beaton Director of Open Source Projects | Eclipse Foundation, Inc.
Meet us at EclipseCon Europe 2018: LUDWIGSBURG, OCTOBER 23 - 25
_______________________________________________ iot-pmc mailing list iot-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxxTo change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/iot-pmc
|
