Consistent contributors are frequently invited to be committers and later PMC members. Having at least three people maintaining anything is an Apache standard for maintaining vendor neutrality, ensuring a minimum number of people can verify release candidates to address security issues or any other releases.
— Matt Sicker > On Dec 29, 2021, at 14:41, Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov.vladi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > >> >> Log4j is owned by the Logging Services PMC. You cannot incubate it without > this PMC’s approval. > > Exactly. As far as I understand, Logging pmc should accept patches and > release fixes or they should approve reincubating. > Of course, you can try rejecting patches and disapprove reincubation, > however, that won't hold water. > > Unfortunately, I have not seen the response from the logging pmc regarding > approve/disapprove re-incubating. There's a pending question to Ron still. > > I do not consider forks outside of the ASF. > >> But I notice the one topic you did not respond to was the lack of > interested people other than yourself. Why is that? > > I find the question irrelevant, and I find it has nothing to do with > accepting patches and releasing 1.2 > I belive there were even people on incubator thread, so it is strange why > do you demand that I provide you with a list of rock-star 1.x maintainers. > > 1) I can't guarantee I will be alive in February. Can you guarantee all the > logging pmc members will be alive then? I doubt so. So I find that > questions like "how can we be sure you will send patches" too intimate. > > 2) I have already filed a patch for buildscripts. Whould you review it and > merge? > > 3) Suppose I find a team (e.g 4-5 ASF fellows) who are willing to support > 1.2. What do you do then? Would you add all of them to the logging pmc? > I don't really see the point why do you ask, and at the same time I can't > guarantee the people I gather will be alive tomorrow. I can't guarantee > they will always have interest in 1.2 > > Vladimir
