Fwd: Re: Managing Emeritus Committers

[Jacques Le Roux]

Interesting answer from infra, not sure we want to manage that...

Jacques

-------- Message transféré --------
Sujet : Re: Managing Emeritus Committers
Date : Wed, 20 Apr 2016 12:40:10 +0200
De : Daniel Gruno <[hidden email]>
Pour : John Burwell <[hidden email]>, [hidden email]



On 04/20/2016 12:37 PM, John Burwell wrote:

> All,
>
> I apologize in advance if I am asking this question in the wrong place.
> The CloudStack project is discussing allowing an "emeritus" status for
> committers [1].  From a mechanical perspective, does infra have a
> recommended way of managing emeritus status in LDAP?
>
> Thank you for your help,
> -John
>
> [1]: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cloudstack-dev/201604.mbox/%3CC10BA166-00CF-4D31-ACC8-FFD42CE2605A%40shapeblue.com%3E

commit bits are...binary bits, they can be 1 or they can be 0. We don't
operate with trinary bits here, sorry.

If you want to have emeritus committers, your best bet is to remove them
from the ldap group and keep a log in your pmc dir of their names.

With regards,
Daniel.

[Sharan-F]

Hi Jacques

I thought that the discussion Ron raised was more about communication rather than actually disabling access. I agree with you in the sense that I think it could turn out to be considerably more work than we would want to manage.

Thanks
Sharan

[Ron Wheeler]

Given that Cloudstack (and Apache) considers "committer" status to be a
permanent status and that an emeritus committer can reactivate
unilaterally, it does not seems necessary (or even reasonable) to
restrict their access, unless they request it.

Main points from the Cloudstack example:
1) rules are explicit and PMC decisions are recorded in the bylaws
2) clear recognition of past contribution (and perhaps remaining but
passive  interest in the project) while keeping the "active" list
accurately reflecting the people who are currently contributing in an
on-going basis.

Ron

On 21/04/2016 1:49 AM, Sharan-F wrote:

> Hi Jacques
>
> I thought that the discussion Ron raised was more about communication rather
> than actually disabling access. I agree with you in the sense that I think
> it could turn out to be considerably more work than we would want to manage.
>
> Thanks
> Sharan
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/Fwd-Re-Managing-Emeritus-Committers-tp4679835p4679850.html
> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>

--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: [hidden email]
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: [phone], ext 102

[Jacques Le Roux]

Sincerely I don't think anybody in the PMC wants to invest in this. If I'm wrong please chime in

Jacques

Le 21/04/2016 15:34, Ron Wheeler a écrit :

> Given that Cloudstack (and Apache) considers "committer" status to be a permanent status and that an emeritus committer can reactivate unilaterally,
> it does not seems necessary (or even reasonable) to restrict their access, unless they request it.
>
> Main points from the Cloudstack example:
> 1) rules are explicit and PMC decisions are recorded in the bylaws
> 2) clear recognition of past contribution (and perhaps remaining but passive  interest in the project) while keeping the "active" list accurately
> reflecting the people who are currently contributing in an on-going basis.
>
> Ron
>
> On 21/04/2016 1:49 AM, Sharan-F wrote:
>> Hi Jacques
>>
>> I thought that the discussion Ron raised was more about communication rather
>> than actually disabling access. I agree with you in the sense that I think
>> it could turn out to be considerably more work than we would want to manage.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Sharan
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/Fwd-Re-Managing-Emeritus-Committers-tp4679835p4679850.html
>> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>
>