election_proposal
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision | |||
|
election_proposal [2015/10/01 19:13] Dave Neary |
election_proposal [2015/10/01 19:34] Dave Neary |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
| I propose adopting the following processes for member board elections: | I propose adopting the following processes for member board elections: | ||
| - | * "Individual committer member" to be modified to "Active Technical Contributor", a status to be defined by the board and the TSC, based on active contributions to the project, including (but not limited to): | + | * "Individual committer member" to be modified to "Active Technical Contributor", a status to be defined by the board and the TSC, based on active contributions to the project. |
| - | * Git commits | + | * The level of contributions should be objective, and measurable - automated where possible. |
| - | * Gerrit reviews | + | * Criteria could include (in each case, "in last 12 months" to ensure active contribution): |
| - | * Wiki page edits | + | * Git commits (1 commit, same as OpenStack) |
| - | * Blueprints submitted to upstream projects | + | * Gerrit reviews (5 Gerrit reviews) |
| - | * OPNFV User Group co-ordination | + | * Wiki page edits (25 wiki page edits) |
| + | * Blueprints submitted to upstream projects (primary submitter of 1 blueprint) | ||
| + | * OPNFV User Group co-ordination (at least one OPNFV User Group meeting organized) | ||
| + | * Membership of any board or TSC committee (marketing, strategic planning, board, TSC, C&C) | ||
| + | * Project maintainer | ||
| + | * Other potential criteria could be: | ||
| + | * Patches submitted to upstream project on an OPNFV blueprint (hard to measure) | ||
| + | * Attendance at weekly technical call (hard to measure) | ||
| + | * Project committer (tricky, because relies on maintainers to maintain good "active contributor/committer" lists) | ||
| + | * Pharos lab administrator | ||
| + | * Project ambassador - speaking about OPNFV in an event, or representing the project to the press | ||
| - | The logic behind this is that OPNFV is a "mid-stream" project - many of the most beneficial activities in our community are not source code related (or, at least, not in the OPNFV project), so this is the wrong metric to use. We will soon have community metrics we can use to measure participation in other areas, and we should use these to define voting rights. | + | OPNFV is a "mid-stream" project - many of the most beneficial activities in our community are not source code related (or, at least, not in the OPNFV project), so this is the wrong metric to use. In addition, different projects have different bars for commit access, or do not maintain the committer lists with the same dilligence, and I would expect voting rights to be set to some objective level of participation. Using the committer lists also puts the burden of maintaining the voting list to project maintainers (via the INFO files) and as the number of maintainers grows with the number of projects, the risk of disenfranchising community members by omission grows. |
| + | |||
| + | We will soon have community metrics we can use to measure participation in other areas, and we should use these to define voting rights. | ||
| ==== Proposal 2: Community election process ==== | ==== Proposal 2: Community election process ==== | ||
election_proposal.txt · Last modified: 2015/10/01 19:34 by Dave Neary
Page Tools
Except where otherwise noted, content on this wiki is licensed under the following license: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
