Re: [Xen-devel] Konrad R Wilk's Xen Project Committer Status confirmed (+ some governance policy concerns)

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 11:51:27AM +0000, Lars Kurth wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I wanted to to summarize the outcome of the vote for Konrad's committer
> status. We had 4 votes in favor and one abstained. Which means Konrad is
> confirmed.

Thank you!

I wished I had an acceptance speech prepared!! But in lieu of that I
want to thank for the trust and the regard the community has of me.

Again, thank you!

I am quite thankfull and am thrilled to be able to make a difference!
> 
> A number of concerns were raised, e.g. shouldn't other maintainers (e.g.
> George Dunlap as past release manager, or Stefano Stabellini) also be
> nominated as a committer. This could be relatively easily fixed, but
> requires one of the other committers to make a nomination.
> 
> Concerns about the definition of the committer role were raised. In
> summary, the governance policy today defines the committer role purely in
> terms of a maintainer with write access. However the role is actually also
> about being entrusted with the safety, governance and the stewardship of
> the project. This is implied in the governance document, but not spelled
> out.
> 
> Tim Deegan, described the issue quite well:
> 
> "It's clear from the governance document that the committers are expected
> to resolve disagreements that the maintainers and contributors can't sort
> out between themselves.
> 
> So maybe we should have a discussion about separating the roles of
> committer-with-tree-access and committer-for-governance?  For me, the set
> of people who should be settling disputes is a subset of the set of people
> I would trust with push access to xen.git. IOW I'm a little wary of
> creating a group of people who make technical decisions but aren't
> themselves technical."
> 
> This concern does not apply to Konrad, who has excellent standing in the
> community and has been actively involved in design, development and review
> inside the hypervisor.

Thank you for those kind words!
> 
> We don't need to resolve this issue before the 4.5 release. I think we
> should roll this up with a general review of our governance in spring. When
> I wrote up the contributor training document (see
> http://www.slideshare.net/xen_com_mgr/xen-project-contributor-training-part-2-processes-and-conventions-v10),
> it became clear that there are a number of conventions that are not well
> documented. These don't necessarily need to be part of the governance, but
> the governance document should probably link to some of our conventions.

<nods>
> 
> Best Regards
> Lars

> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel