Thanks for putting these references together. I'd say let's go and Dao be with you!
Cos On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 09:29AM, Cédric Champeau wrote: > And to conclude: yes, we have added such committers to the project. For > reference, in addition to the initial list of committers, we added: > - Dierk Koenig, non code committing so far, but Elder > - AndrA(c)s Almiray, pushed code once, but more importantly, another Elder > - Russel Winder, who is the definition of someone committed to the project > but not pushing code :) > - Keegan Witt, code pushing committer > I honestly think we have a serious core here, and not all Apache projects, > including TLP, can say that they have such an active community... > 2015-09-30 9:20 GMT+02:00 Emmanuel LA(c)charny <elecha...@gmail.com>: > > Le 29/09/15 15:33, Bertrand Delacretaz a A(c)crit : > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 3:23 PM, CA(c)dric Champeau > > <cedric.champ...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> ....One exit criteria is "growing the community", and growing > >> the community means finding new "committers", aka, people committed > to the > >> project. And The definition here of committer binds it to having > write > >> access to the repository, which has nothing to do with it IMHO.... > > You are technically correct but giving those people commit access to > > the repository, as part of making them committers, doesn't hurt. > > > > It's useful for 99% for them and for the others it's not a problem - > > we trust them not to touch what they don't master (like any committer) > > and worst case version control is our friend. > > > > So having two different roles for "coding committers" and "non-coding > > committers" would complicate things while bringing no tangible > > benefit. > > > > Basically, if you think someone is committed to Groovy and deserves to > > be listed as such, make them committers, as there's no better role > > here and the coding or non-coding distinction is not useful. > > As a matter of fact, at Directory, we voted in someone who never > contributed any code, but who spent a lot of his time educating people > on how to use the software, and more important, advertized the project. > We would call him an 'evangelist' at Sun /Oracle (except that > evangelists have been recently eradicated from Oracle ;-) > > However, we had to grant him commit access to the code base, because > it's part of the process. But there is more than just code in our coe > base : > - documentation > - site > - scripts > > and in this very case, he participated a lot of the site. So, yes, a > committer is much more than just someone who write code, and yes, it's > simpler to have one single commit flag for the project.
