[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [modeling-pmc] IP Log Review for modeling.mmt.*

Hi,
 
I contacted with Radek on 30th of May and he agreed on proposed changes to QVTo project. He just forgot how to initiate the process so Ed Willing provided me with steps todo. I forwarded them to Radek today so the process will start I think tomorrow.
 
Below is email from Ed Willing with the proposed changes:
  
> From: Ed Willink <ed@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Fri, May 25, 2012 at 9:26 AM
> Subject: QVTo leaders and committers
> To: Sergey Boyko <serg.boyko2011@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Hi Sergey
> The QVTo IP Log prompted Wayne to look closely at QVTo and overinterpret the inactivity of the project. So while IP Log and RC1 have
> removed the imminent risk of Juno exclusion, he remains concerned about the state of the project.
>  
> We need to move promptly to the following position (as I think we agreed)
>  
> QVTo leader - Sergey Boyko
> QVTo committer - Ed Willink
> QVTo committer - Radomil Dvorak (if he wants to stay)
>
> If the existing QVTo team do not sort this out, the EMO are likely to intervene, declare the project dysfunctional
> and make me the project lead. I don't want this, since I would prefer existing members to retire gracefully and
> hopefully rejoin a stronger project in a few years time if their circumstances then allow it.

I didn't see email thread (which comes below) and above responded only the last email (thanks to Ed Merks for CCing on list).
 
A few notes to the thread below.
 
About funds from Nicolas.
Actually there was nothing more then initial intention and at least on this subject I didn't make any commitment (Ed, I believe that when you talk on subject like this it's correctly to CC all participated parties).
 
About IP Log.
I submitted it right after I've issued RC build but due to recent changes with m2m->mmt renaming it was not published immediately. That's why Wayne didn't find builds.
 
About staying on the train and doing the relevant builds/IP logs etc.
I beleive that I can continue on that (probably with some help from Adolfo) so I think that should not be the only reason for Ed Willing to become QVTo commiter.
 
Regards,
  Sergey
 

 
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Ed Willink <ed@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Ed

Yes. There has been some contact. Two days ago I responded to a how-to-proceed query with a recommendation that Radek email mmt-dev to stand down and propose a new leader. I'm a bit disconcerted that nothing has yet happened. I was expecting to get to +2,0,-0 with 1 not voting quickly and decisively. But so far it has only been 36 hours. Give it another 36, then we can discuss how to get an election started so that non-voters have failed to participate. I'm not an MMT/QVTo committer so I cannot start an election.

The decommitterize option may also be needed to sort out the MMT/ATL co-leadership election that stands at +3,0,-0 with 3 not voting after six days. Reminder already sent. Eight days to wait.

    Regards

        Ed



On 31/05/2012 05:14, Ed Merks wrote:
Ed,

Have you or committers on the project attempted to contact Radomil?  I've taken the position in the past (for EMF core for example) that anyone not voting in a committer election would be decommiterized, and have followed up on that premise with exactly that action.  It's not as drastic or severe as it sounds, or is it final.  It's easy for the committers to add someone back in should they choose to become active again.  We simply can't have important processes held up because of inactivity.  Yes it's nice to be a committer on a project, but if even just voting is not possible, the level of involvement simply doesn't merit committer status.

Regards,
Ed


On 25/05/2012 5:39 AM, Wayne Beaton wrote:
Here's what I think we should do.

The PMC should attempt to contact Radomil and ask his intentions regarding the project.

If he is unresponsive, or responds that he wants to give up the position, the PMC can declare the project dysfunctional and request that the EMO replace Sergey with you for project lead. If he responds otherwise, I have some other thoughts.

The EDP says that the decision to replace a project lead requires the unanimous consent of the PMC. We generally regard this to mean "no -1s" on a public vote in the PMC mailing list.

Once you are project lead, you retire the two inactive committers and initiate a committer election for yourself. Sergey will have to vote +1 in this election or it will fail. Once he does vote +1, the election will wrap up immediately and you'll be provisioned. If Sergey doesn't respond, I have some other thoughts.

Does this plan sound evil enough, or do I need to include sharks with frickin' lasers?

Wayne

On 05/23/2012 03:03 PM, Ed Willink wrote:
Hi Wayne

Booting QVTo has bad ripples because GMF and more downstream projects depend on it.

At about M3.5 there was a major email exchange when it appeared that QVTo would not be in Juno.

As a result, Nicolas Rouquette (JPL/Nasa) personally funded Sergey Boyko the sole remaining fractionally active committer to get it into Juno. M4 happened but little else. Minimal email response. One Bugzilla comment a few days ago.

So, on the one hand, Nicolas is being short changed in not getting what he funded/agreed to fund.

On the other, I want QVTo to stay on the train and will do the relevant builds/IP logs etc. Very little to do I suspect.

To expedite this, I need to be a QVTo committer.

About six weeks ago Sergey agreed that it would be a good idea if he moved up to project lead, and I became a committer. I am qualified to be a committer since about six QVTo plugins were developed by me.

With Sergey being so inactive, perhaps I should be bumped direct to project lead.

    Regards

        Ed Willink

On 23/05/2012 19:53, Wayne Beaton wrote:
The project metadata needs to be updated, and project activity seems pretty quiet.

There is no evidence of builds of QVT Operational since the Indigo release.

My assessment is that QVT operational should be booted from the simultaneous release. But that's up to the Planning Council due to lack of engagement in the process.

I'll send a note.

Wayne

On 05/23/2012 06:49 AM, Ed Willink wrote:
Hi

For MMT projects, I hope that ATL will be efficient, but I fear that QVTo may need 'encouragement'. Can you please let me know the current state of play?

    Regards

        Ed Willink


--
Wayne Beaton
The Eclipse Foundation
Twitter: @waynebeaton
Explore Eclipse Projects

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2176 / Virus Database: 2425/5017 - Release Date: 05/23/12


--
Wayne Beaton
The Eclipse Foundation
Twitter: @waynebeaton
Explore Eclipse Projects

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2178 / Virus Database: 2425/5033 - Release Date: 05/30/12



_______________________________________________
modeling-pmc mailing list
modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc