That's kinda ridiculous BJ. There are committer guidelines that if they are not being followed, then as a community we have to figure out what to do in that case. If non-committers don't follow the rules of posting, do we still get their contributions in there? I don't think so. So, my only point is that there's no one out there who should get special treatment, but their history should be thought of and they should be asked to comply to the guidelines that the community has agreed upon.

Cheers,
Tim
--
Tim Ruppert
HotWax Media
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com

o:801.649.6594
f:801.649.6595


On Aug 16, 2008, at 10:23 AM, BJ Freeman wrote:

So it comes down to :is his contribution worth the hassle".
That would, imho, be like saying those that don't have commit rights
should not be considered.
But I find there are committers that are willing to make the extra
effort to help those that can not.
On that note as long as there is one commiter that is willing to monitor or facilitate the changes Si makes, there should not be any action taken.

Only when every committer has voice a negative should there be any
action take.



Tim Ruppert sent the following on 8/16/2008 8:55 AM:
My position would be that if he doesn't want to be part of the
community, why should everyone else bear the burden of watching him more
closely than anyone else?  It's kinda ridiculous.

That being said, Si has made invaluable contributions throughout the
years, so my vote would be to talk with him about following the best
practices of being a committer and give him this leeway to comply.
Should he continue to decide not too, it is not the responsibility of
the rest of the community to perform additional work because of it and
his rights should be removed.

My two cents.

Cheers,
Tim
--
Tim Ruppert
HotWax Media
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com

o:801.649.6594
f:801.649.6595


On Aug 16, 2008, at 9:04 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:

I know this is an annoying situation, but since Si in the past few
months has ignored our suggestion to discuss things in the mailing
lists, instead of just writing uni-directional messages using Jira, I
don't think we will have any luck in this. I am sure he understands
this is far from an optimal setup (as I am sure that he would be able to create message filters for managing the volume of the ml traffic),
and we can't (nor want) force him to do something he has decided to
not concede us.

Jacopo

On Aug 16, 2008, at 4:26 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:

How about we issue a "strongly worded letter?" ;-)

Seriously though, when I first subscribed to the lists, I balked at
the volume of incoming mail. I still needed to read it so I set up
filters to sort it. I'm sure Si could do the same.

I agree he should retain his commit privileges, but I also believe he
needs to participate in the dev list (at least).

-Adrian


--- On Fri, 8/15/08, David E Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

From: David E Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: svn commit: r686301 - in /ofbiz/trunk/framework/ webapp: dtd/site-conf.xsd src/org/ofbiz/webapp/control/ ConfigXMLReader.java
src/org/ofbiz/webapp/control/RequestHandler.java
To: [email protected]
Date: Friday, August 15, 2008, 9:01 PM
On Aug 15, 2008, at 2:20 PM, Adam Heath wrote:

Scott Gray wrote:
Forwarding since Si doesn't subscribe to the
dev list

Er, he has commit access, but doesn't subscribe?
Should this be
disallowed?

There are definitely people that have a problem with this,
and it is a
weird situation. It is true that all committers should
follow the dev
list and watch for things for them, as well as for things
that relate
to things they have worked on. They should also monitor the
commits
list to monitor all changes to areas of the project they
are familiar
with.

Unfortunately Si seems to have chosen not to do this, and
not to stay
involved in this way with OFBiz. It's also unfortunate
that he doesn't
discuss his changes a whole lot, and issues do tend to come
up with
them that are often not resolved or not adequately
resolved. In other
words, he usually uses his commit privileges to get things
into the
project quickly for his convenience and isn't really
participating in
the community.

While unfortunate, what to do about it is another question.
Should the
PMC really vote to remove his commit privileges? My guess
is no, that
wouldn't be a good action or conducive to community
building.

So instead we keep a close eye on his commits, knowing that
dues to
his infrequent community interactions and commits that he
may have a
harder time with things that he puts in. Along with this,
as Scott
mentioned, he does contribute valuable things here and
there and that
is great for the project. There are other people in this
boat to, and
really all committers should review the work of other
committers for
the sake of the project.

Anyway, it's something on the back-burner and not
something that there
seems to be something to do about right away, and whether
there is
anything the PMC could do to improve the situation or not
is still a
big question.

-David







Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Reply via email to