[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [ee4j-pmc] Additional spec lead for servlet-api?
|
Greg,I agree, there
is no need to stop the vote. I think that was just an "over
reaction" request. As you said, the vote was started -- we'll
let it run it's course.But, I do not
agree that more Project Leads provides more structure and governance. Maybe
you want to enforce some more rules on the github repos ala what the jax-rs
team did. I believe they require two (or maybe three?) approvals
before something can be merged. And, if there is dissenting review,
then all of the approvals get reset and the PR needs to be looked at fresh
again. TBH, in my mind, that is overkill and I don't necessarily
recommend that much structure. But, maybe that's just me. And,
maybe it's required for Servlet. I don't know.Also, if there
are rogue actors in your Projects that are committing things just because
they can, then the Team has a duty to help manage that. They should
work with that rogue developer and try to explain why their actions are
counter-productive the wider team. And, if it continues, the team
can take action to remove that person from the committer list. Hopefully,
it wouldn't come to that. Hopefully, it's just a misunderstanding
by the rogue developer and we can all be educated and we can move on in
a productive manner.An Eclipse Project
Lead should not be "all powerful". They are only meant
for guidance.
---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter
STSM, MicroProfile and Jakarta EE architect @ IBM
e-mail: sutter@xxxxxxxxxx Twitter: @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutterFrom:
Greg
Wilkins <gregw@xxxxxxxxxxx>To:
EE4J
PMC Discussions <ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>Date:
01/23/2020
11:15Subject:
[EXTERNAL]
Re: [ee4j-pmc] Additional spec lead for servlet-api?Sent
by: ee4j-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Paul et al,I could not disagree more about the need
for a "core review team". Currently the servlet-api
project has 15 committers and we have already had issues where a PR has
been made by one, review by another, merged all without knowledge of the
spec leads and in a few hours (which were the middle of the night for both
spec leads). We've even had release candidates made in similar
ways. To combat this, we have said that all PRs need approval
from a spec lead - thus we have defacto created a core review team.
the proposal to include Mark as a co-lead exactly intended
to increase the "core review team".I just do not believe that 15 equal committers
can collaborate productively without some structure. I don't
want the old single leader commits everything model, but the 15 equal committers
is too far the other way. We are striving for a happy medium.I'm not sure on what basis the vote should
be stopped. It's been proposed, if the vote gets up, then we
have 3 leads. If enough people think it is a bad idea, then the vote wont
get up and we'll only have 2 leads.regardsOn Thu, 23 Jan 2020 at 18:00, Paul Nicolucci
<pnicolucci@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:Hi,I also agree that 3 leads seems excessive
when the primary role of the lead is to be a guiding voice on process rather
than making decisions and having some sort of special privilege within
the project. If there are specific reviews/work that are required within
the Servlet project that man/brain power is required for then some threads
should be started in the project in my opinion to get input from the rest
of the committers on the project and allow them to offer a helping hand
wherever necessary.I think we need to get away from the
concept of having a "core review team" and be more transparent
within the individual projects.Regards,Paul NicolucciOn Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 10:19 AM arjan
tijms <arjan.tijms@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:Hi,Though I voted for Mark, based on the
fact he's very active and experienced, I do agree with 3 Project Leads
being too much.Perhaps in this case Greg might want
to step down then?Kind regards,ArjanOn Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 4:50 PM Dmitry
Kornilov <dmitry.kornilov@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:I agree with what Kevin said about a
number of leads. One lead is ideal, two is acceptable, more than two
is too many. I don’t have anything agains Mark, he is a great project
lead, but I think that in order to get him elected someone needs to step
out to keep a number of leads reasonable. I don’t agree with complete elimination
of Project Lead role. I see this situation as a consequence of misunderstanding
of what project lead role is. We should work more on explaining EDP to
committers and make it more clear.- DmitryOn 23 Jan 2020, at 16:25, Ivar Grimstad
<ivar.grimstad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:Yes, let's put it on the agenda. I don't
think it is a big problem. More a communication thing that we need to continue
doing for a while in order to get the thought of a spec lead role to go
away. After all, it is 20 years of history we are competing with. It will
take some time, but we will get there :)IvarOn Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 4:42 PM Kevin
Sutter <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:I guess I was
too late with this input since I see that the vote already started... :-)
Ivar,
Let's put this on our agenda for our next call. I'm concerned that
this proliferation of Project Leads can be misconstrued as a requirement
to make decisions for a given Project. We need to emphasize that
the Project committers and community are key to making decisions.
The Project Leads should be considered "shephards" of the process,
not Specification Leads (as in the old JCP definition). Even the
title of this note thread seems to imply "spec leads" vs "project
leads". Thanks.
---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter
STSM, MicroProfile and Jakarta EE architect @ IBM
e-mail: sutter@xxxxxxxxxx Twitter: @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter
From: "Kevin
Sutter" <sutter@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: EE4J
PMC Discussions <ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 01/23/2020
08:10
Subject: [EXTERNAL]
Re: [ee4j-pmc] Additional spec lead for servlet-api?
Sent by: ee4j-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Question... do you really need a third Project lead to enable these
wheels of progress? Remember, we do not have Specification Leads
like we did in the JCP days. The Project Lead is used to help the
project team follow and adhere to the Eclipse processes. All committers
on the Project should have equal footing to enable progress on the Specifications,
APIs, and the TCK (if there is one in the Servlet project). I would
really question why a third Project Lead is required.
A bit of background... I know from past experiences both with Jakarta
EE and MicroProfile that even two Project Leads is questionable by Eclipse.
But, we have found two Project Leads to be useful to help even the
playing field. For example, with MicroProfile, myself and John Clingan
are co-Project Leads. We communicate on a regular basis and we cover
for each other when the other can't do the Project Lead responsibilities
due to vacation or other work activities. We have never entertained
the thought of requiring a third Project Lead. All of the MicroProfile
committers chip in to help with the various project responsibilities.
One bad example is the EE4J Platform Project. Here we have six Project
Leads. The reason is that when all of these Projects were getting
created for Jakarta EE, we didn't want to spend the time to determine the
proper Project Leads. So, all of the lead organizations ante'd up
a person and we all became Project Leads. Again, I know that Eclipse
wasn't thrilled with this approach. And, we should probably revisit
this at some point.
So, going forward with nominating another Project Lead is your project's
choice. As Ivar mentioned, it is a required vote among all of the
committers on the Servlet Project. I would just consider whether
another Project Lead is really necessary to accomplish what you are looking
for. Thanks.
---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter
STSM, MicroProfile and Jakarta EE architect @ IBM
e-mail: sutter@xxxxxxxxxx Twitter: @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter
From: Ivar
Grimstad <ivar.grimstad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: EE4J
PMC Discussions <ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 01/23/2020
00:46
Subject: [EXTERNAL]
Re: [ee4j-pmc] Additional spec lead for servlet-api?
Sent by: ee4j-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Hi Greg,
You can propose a new project lead and start an election among the committers
using the committee tools on the servlet project page https://projects.eclipse.org/projects/ee4j.servlet/developer
Ivar
On Thu, Jan 23, 2020, 08:21 Greg Wilkins <gregw@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hi PMC,
Stuart and I would like to add Mark Thomas as a third co-lead in the servlet-spec
project. Having the extra man power and a third brain in the core
review team would grease the wheels of progress. What is the
process to make this happen?
regards
--
Greg Wilkins <gregw@xxxxxxxxxxx>
CTO http://webtide.com_______________________________________________
ee4j-pmc mailing list
ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc_______________________________________________
ee4j-pmc mailing list
ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc
_______________________________________________
ee4j-pmc mailing list
ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc
_______________________________________________
ee4j-pmc mailing list
ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc
-- Ivar
GrimstadJakarta
EE Developer Advocate | Eclipse
Foundation, Inc.Eclipse
Foundation:
The Platform for Open Innovation and Collaboration_______________________________________________
ee4j-pmc mailing list
ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc_______________________________________________
ee4j-pmc mailing list
ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc
_______________________________________________
ee4j-pmc mailing list
ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc
_______________________________________________
ee4j-pmc mailing list
ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc
-- Greg Wilkins <gregw@xxxxxxxxxxx>
CTO http://webtide.com_______________________________________________
ee4j-pmc mailing list
ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc