On 2/2/02 6:50 AM, "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The vote was on a release, and the vote passed. > > An issue regarding attribution was resolved. The committers are still > honing some fine points, but the package is on it's way. > > Apparently, Peter feels that "I have been stymied by "committers" who > vetoed things but had never done > anywork and never intended doing any work on something. It aint > something I am not willing to invite again." Huh. That wasn't my read. Peter's "-1" seemed to be a reaction to being told that since he wasn't in the 'STATUS file', what he said didn't much matter as to the release. This statement about the STATUS file was indeed in error. However, I think his point was well made - in a meritocracy, he shouldn't have had the ability to do what he did. > > and so has problems with our politics. > > Personally, I would never permit any veto not based on the technical > merits stand. And how would you go about that? You have no choice, do you? Is there anything that states that voting is based on technical merits? I don't think so. For example, you might not want to release something because you think the documentation isn't ready, or the timing is bad, or some such... > The Committers are a jury, but there is an avenue of > appeal. Happily, that avenue is rarely pursued. > > Since the purpose of ASF and Jakarta is to permit codebases to survive > their developers, it is not reasonable to say that you can only vote on > code that you developed. Eventually, we will all become custodians of > code that we did not create, but must support and maintain. Isn't it to survive their initial developers, to provide a mechanism through which a merit-based community can grow? I think that Peter demonstrated some serious issues, and we should address them. I suppose that others don't think there is a problem - somone suggested that all is fine because of how well commons is doing. I think success is a lagging indicator. geir -- Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] System and Software Consulting You're going to end up getting pissed at your software anyway, so you might as well not pay for it. Try Open Source. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
