Glen Mazza wrote:
> Committership is a months-long-process, and I'll need
> to see contributions from your individual named well
> past those of Chris, Clay or Andreas before we
> consider such a move. FYI, he's at about 1% of them
> right now.
-1 on imposing a months-long-process for committer status. Far better, IMO,
is the standard of whether the project is better off with this person as a
committer. I was roundly criticized for nominating you earlier than was
usual, but I thought your judgment and skills were sufficient that it was a
net benefit to the project to not slow you down with the patch process. I
still have high hopes that I will be proven right on this point :-) My point
is that I knew you much less well than Bertrand knows Peter.
> I'm surprised you would have us vote for a committer
> someone who just submitted this patch yesterday:
>
> if (floatValue < 0) {
> floatValue = 0;
> }
> - return (int) floatValue * 255;
> + return (int) (floatValue * 255);
> }
>
> My, such complexity! Perhaps 1000 people have
> contributed more substantive patches--are we to make
> them committers too? Maybe if you had decided to lift
> a finger for the project and *apply* his patches your
> proposal would have carried more weight.
-1 on blatant disrespect for Peter and Bertrand. Peter did submit a patch on
Tuesday morning (my time) which I fairly promptly applied, recognizing it as
one that I should probably handle. This was a more substantive patch than
the one mentioned above, and Bertrand would not have had time to apply it:
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23022
Perhaps more importantly, I think it is a mistake to judge a patch by its
size or complexity. If it fixed a problem, I appreciate the submission. The
first million or so patches/commits that I made were to documentation,
hardly a glamorous or complex occupation (although I find it hard work), but
one that I thought needed attention. I suspect that the only reason I am a
committer is because I was a constant annoyance to Keiron (which was not my
intention).
> You just insulted the entire FOP team--committers and
> contributors--with your ridiculous suggestion. It
> would probably be best for the project for you to keep
> yourself inactive.
-1 on blatant disrespect for Bertrand. I do not feel insulted at all. If you
see someone who needs help and you know the solution but don't have time to
implement it yourself, it is reasonable to tell someone else so that they
can do it. I don't know, but guess that is probably what Bertrand is doing
here. My first impression of Peter's work is that he knew what he was doing,
and I am grateful to have Bertrand's affirmation of that impression.
Thank you Peter for your submissions. Please keep them coming, and I
apologize in advance if I am slow in processing them. Thank you Bertrand for
the advice and comments, and for your contributions to this project. They
will weigh heavily in my thinking. I look forward to the day when you can
become active again.
<Easily-Disregarded-Philosophizing>
The single most important thing that FOP developers can do right now is to
develop other FOP developers. All of my efforts are bent toward the shortest
path that will allow me to say (with a straight face) "FOP is a fun place to
work. Come help us." It will be fatal to gain a reputation for eating our
young or disrespecting past contributors because, for whatever reason, they
are not contributing right now. I have already addressed the issue of
disrespect for current contributors in another thread (unanswered to date).
I do not mean to discourage thoughtful, reasonable discussions -- heated
even, if necessary. We actually need quite a bit of this to get the
infrastructure built. But I hope it will always be done from the standpoint
of respect, at least until it is clear that respect cannot be given.
<Easily-Disregarded-Philosophizing>
Victor Mote
