[Pulp-dev] Core Commit Bit Process

[David Davis]

+1


David

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 12:37 PM, Jeff Ortel <jortel at redhat.com> wrote:

> Thanks for the proposal, Brian.  Looks fine to me.
>
>
> On 05/21/2018 04:48 PM, Brian Bouterse wrote:
>
> For core and it's related tools, we don't have a written process to
> describe giving the commit bit to a contributor. We've been wanting to
> agree on and document that process for a while, so I'm facilitating thread
> gathering ideas to inform the writing of a PUP.
>
> This starter email gives a brief history of what we've done and outlines a
> simple proposal to get us started. We can throw that proposal away in favor
> of any other idea.
>
> # History
>
> Historically if you were hired onto the Pulp team at Red Hat you received
> the commit bit day 0. In Oct 2017 we decided to stop doing that and instead
> document an open process. Engineers hired on the pulp time since Oct '17
> have not received commit bit. We have not yet documented an open process of
> which to give it to them or any other proven contributor.
>
> # Current State
>
> The current core devs as shown on github are: asmacdo, bizhang, bmbouter,
> daviddavis, dkliban, dalley, ipanova, jortel, pcreech, ttereshc
>
> # Scope of this discussion
>
> pulp/pulp, pulp/devel, and any repos for the Pulp3 Ansible installer. It
> applies to both Pulp2 and Pulp3. Plugins will do what they want.
>
> # Process Idea
>
> One process idea is to add a new core committer upon a vote with +1's
> received from all current core developers. The thinking is that all current
> core devs needs to be 100% comfortable for the new person to handle any
> issue in place of themselves.
>
> # Criteria
>
> Overall I believe someone who has demonstrated commitment and care towards
> the needs of all Pulp users and not only their own interests. Also they
> must have the experience to be trusted with major aspects of Pulp
> functionality.
>
> These requirements are somewhat vague by design. Any process with hard
> requirements will be gamed so I believe leaving it to the judgement of the
> existing devs is a safe approach. Anyone who specifically wants to get more
> involved should approach the core devs about mentorship. I think the right
> time will be obvious, and if there are doubts those can be expressed ahead
> of time or at vote time.
>
> # Code owners
>
> This commit bit vote could be for entire core repos, or it could be for a
> subsystem of Pulp enforced using github's "code owners" feature (
> https://blog.github.com/2017-07-06-introducing-code-owners/).
>
>
> ^ is starter content, please send ideas and discussion that will be
> incorporated into a first draft PEP at some point.
>
> -Brian
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-dev mailing listPulp-dev at redhat.comhttps://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20180522/f9e9b984/attachment.htm>