Morgan Delagrange wrote:
> Quite right, your proposal did say "all committers". > Sounds like we're essentially arguing about nothing. > I'm saying that all committers should keep an eye on > commits. You're saying that the PMC should monitor > all commits, but that the PMC should be all the > committers. Fine. > > I'm not sure what is gained by waving a wand over the > committers and naming them an unofficial PMC, but I > agree that we need to be responsible for commits. You're right - we're arguing about nothing. It's just a naming/terminology issue - to make things more in line with what other expect things to be called. But I think there's something more - if we can use it to better organise and keep track of who's active, on what and what other components is he interested in. Right now we kind of use STATUS, but it doesn't reflect who's active or who's monitoring what. I think we should wait for things to at jakarta level to settle down, and then reopen the issue. -- Costin -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@;jakarta.apache.org> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-help@;jakarta.apache.org>
