[DISCUSS] Ideas for new committers?

[Jacques Nadeau]

Hey All,

It's been a bit since we added new committers. Every so often we should make a concerted effort to evaluate if we have anyone who has been contributing that we should consider for committership. As such, I looked through a few of the recent PR closed lists on several repos and identified some people making contributions that aren't commiters. They are listed below.

substrait & mlir-substrait

@ingomueller-net

substrait, substrait-go, bft

@anshuldata, @scgkiran

substrait & substrait-java
@bvolpato, @Blizzara, @andrew-coleman, @mbwhite

I'm sure that others are missing. Who did I miss? Does anyone think we should consider any of those listed or others for committership? It's fine if the answer is no. 

Looking at the list above, I think contributors are split between two different patterns:

1. Holistic community engagers: In addition to their own PRs, they engage on other PRs, join sync, help others out, etc

2. Transactional engagers: Largely just focused on their own PRs. What some call O$$ (e.g. I'm contributing to OSS only because I have to for my job)

I generally think we should focus on rewarding committership to people who fall in the former category more than the latter. What are other people's thoughts?

Thanks,

Jacques

PS: For a reminder to new members of the community, Substrait runs as a transparent community so potential committership is discussed publicly

PPS: @anshuldata and @scgkiran are both my coworkers at Sundeck.

[Weston Pace]

Thank you for doing this!

I would add @mortbopet (substrait-cpp) to the list for consideration.  Not yet as established as some of the other names on your list but one of the few contributors interested in the substrait-cpp repo.  If it weren't for that I would say we need a bit more activity before we can decide.

@ingomueller-net +1 not as many commits as some others but active in the community sync, active in discussions, and there is the mlir work.

@anshuldata / @scgkiran +1 I don't have visibility into the -go, -java commits.  The pure substrait commits seem fine.  From a scan of the go/bft/java commits it seems there is quite a bit of volume here.

@bvolpato +1 Looks like quite a few commits, I'd like to see at least one java SMC vouch for the work though

@blizzara +1 Decent number of commits, I know they are building Substrait integration elsewhere too and I appreciate the precision timestamp work

I don't see enough from the others but maybe I'm missing something?

> I generally think we should focus on rewarding committership to people who fall in the former category more than the latter. What are other people's thoughts?

First, I don't believe in a super high bar for committership.  I think, given the permissions of a committer, the main thing we need is a pattern of decent work to know they are capable, interested, able to work with others, and have at least some sustained amount of activity.

I like transactional and holistic but I dont see any need to mention money (O$$) or jobs.  For me, transactional is more "I need some capability from Substrait and if I no longer need that I'm probably not going to commit anymore".

Holistic is "I want (or need) this project to succeed and want to help out however I can to make that happen."  If this person is only only doing so because they are paid then so be it.  Let's milk that capital while we can ;)

I do agree we should focus on holistic over transactional but think that's a minor concern for committership and a more major concern for SMC.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "substrait" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to substrait+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/substrait/CAJ9XdSocQWJFnqXEztFO2XDTCFVEH%3DkqkJ%2BS_hr4Hj%2B2rTP5aQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Weston Pace]

Ping @vbarua, @EpsilonPrime, @cpcloud

[Victor Barua]

Based on commits and community engagement:

+1: @ingomueller-net: they've been active in the community and have made good spec improvements.

+1: @blizzara: they've been active in substrait-java with good changes and are also working on the Substrait integration with DataFusion, which isn't under our scope but showcases good Substrait stewardship to me.

+1: @brunovolpato: they've been active in substrait-java with general improvements. Full disclosure: I work with Bruno at DataDog.

+1: @anshuldata & @scgkiran: I'm not as familiar with their work, but they appear to be driving substrait-go forward.

Like Weston, I don't necessarily distinguish between transactional and holistic. I'm more interested in whether folks are driving the project in a manner that benefits its long-term health. Transactional engagement is fine by me if the improvements are general purpose and available to everyone.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/substrait/CAE4AYb2Mx1DObKC08dUjjxAxorpH-9gEHVoZtO7t9kL1Cp_iEA%40mail.gmail.com.

[David Sisson]

+1: @ingomueller-net

+1: @blizzara

+1: @brunovolpato

+1: @anshuldata

+1: @scgkiran

[Weston Pace]

I think we can close this vote.  By my count we have:

@ingomueller-net: 4 +1 votes and 0 -1 votes

@blizzara: 4 +1 votes and 0 -1 votes

@brunovolpato / @bvolpato: 4 +1 votes and 0 -1 votes

@anshuldata: 4 +1 votes and 0 -1 votes

@scgkiran: 4 +1 votes and 0 -1 votes

@andrew-coleman: 1 +1 votes and 0 -1 votes

@white: 1 +1 votes and 0 -1 votes

3 votes are required and so I will proceed with sending out invitations to those that met the threshold.  For those that did not, we still very much appreciate the contributions so far and look forward to inviting you in the next round!

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/substrait/e11688ca-c347-444c-b344-b826d31cd7bfn%40googlegroups.com.