>From the sidelines,
Apache projects are encouraged by the norms of the Foundation to
actively recruit new committers and to recognize community-positive
effort with committer status. Apache projects are, at the same time,
given a very wide latitude by the Foundation in making decisions. In
my experience across several other projects, if someone has made a
significant string of contributions over an extended period of time,
it is reasonable for that someone to expect the PMC to give serious
consideration to committer status and to offer some sort of meaningful
feedback if they choose not to grant it. I suppose that in the extreme
a person who feels unfairly excluded could open communication with the
Foundations' board; that would be a somewhat extreme course, and it
would be a very unusual and extreme situation for the board to dictate
to the PMC, but it is theoretically possible.
As I have something of a conflict of interest here, (I am a Foundation
member and am thus charged with facilitating the Foundation's mission,
but I also pay Glenn to work on FOP), I'll leave my remarks about the
Foundation at that.
As for the situation at hand, I'm not sure that Glenn quite decoded
J.Pietschmann's message, which I read as explaining the current
situation in terms of a sleepy PMC rather than an intentionally
exclusive one. Or perhaps he is more interested in the net effect of
the current situation.