Re: [science-pmc] Getting new committers onboard for Science projects

[Jay Jay Billings <jayjaybillings@xxxxxxxxx>]

Streamlining the way we handle committer elections was one of the reasons that drove us to create this TLP. We all had some trouble with the technology PMC and their strict "number of bugs" requirement.

That said, I think you should still provide a justification in the nomination as opposed to leaving it blank or vague. Something like "X is contributing code that does Y and has agreed to maintain it" is enough for me. It should be enough information for committers to make an informed choice, but, in my opinion, does not need to be tied to prior bugs closed or such.

Jay

On Dec 20, 2016 6:48 AM, "Greg Watson" <g.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Yes as Torkild points out, it is necessary to follow the committer election process. However it is up to the project members to decide if the candidate should be elected. There may be contributions that the nominee has made, other than directly working on the project. Project committers should use their discretion in this case.

Greg

> On Dec 20, 2016, at 10:01 AM, Torkild U. Resheim <torkildr@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Erwin,
>
> If he don’t have an Eclipse account he must create one first, then just nominate him as a committer using the portal. The project lead don’t have the power to decide alone. As far as I know there does not _have_ to be any prior work, so you should be able to proceed without it.
>
> If the vote succeeds there is some paperwork to do. And then he should be able to contribute without having to file a CQ.
>
> There is a summary of the process at the Wiki[1]. The Eclipse Project Handbook is also a useful resource [2].
>
> Best regards
> Torkild
>
> [1] https://wiki.eclipse.org/Development_Resources/Becoming_a_Committer
> [2] https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/
> --
> Torkild Ulvøy Resheim
> Consultant / Eclipse Committer / Senior Software Developer
> Itema AS - http://itema.no
>
>> 20. des. 2016 kl. 10.36 skrev Erwin De Ley <erwin.de.ley@xxxxxxxxxx>:
>>
>> Dear Science PMC colleagues,
>>
>> We've been in touch with someone who is preparing a very interesting contribution for Triquetrum and is interested to become a committer.
>> Christopher and me would definitely like to have him on-board and his work would become a strategic part of Triquetrum.
>>
>> I've hit a procedural wall not so long ago when trying to get Jonah accepted as a Triquetrum committer, while still with the technology PMC.
>>
>> So I would like to know what the procedure is now for the Science PMC.
>>
>> - Can we accept that project leads are able to decide who can become a committer?
>> - Or do we still need some "red tape" like e.g. first go through a CQ and me committing his work and then using that as merrit to get him accepted?
>> - Or...?
>>
>> thanks
>>
>> erwin
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> science-pmc mailing list
>> science-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/science-pmc
>
> _______________________________________________
> science-pmc mailing list
> science-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/science-pmc

_______________________________________________
science-pmc mailing list
science-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/science-pmc