On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 11:01 PM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In RTC, a contributor sending in a patch, a pull request, or a JIRA/patch > is handled exactly the same as any other committer. None are trusted to > apply their change, until they receive review and permission from others. > So you would think that "everybody" would get committer status on Day One. > Why not? No effective difference between contributor and committer. "Oh, he > gets a committer privilege bit to apply the change." ... That's it. A > committer bit. No other difference from John Doe contributor. > The big difference is that once you're a committer, you can get a binding code review (and thus commit other people's work). Being voted as a committer is showing that the project feels you've obtained enough experience with the code to carefully review and understand the context of other contributors' work. In other words, the committer bit is not actually about committing in an RTC word, but rather about reviewing. But "Reviewer" doesn't have the same ring to it. I think it's a _plus_ that contributors and committers contribute code in the same way -- it's more of a level playing field for new people contributing to the project. FWIW other non-ASF projects do have something like the model you're describing. For example, it's pretty easy to become a "Committer" on Chromium, but it's somewhat more difficult to become an "Owner" (which gives you the ability to binding review patches). Having contributed a couple small things to that community, I found it perfectly reasonable. > "Hey! We want to invite you to become a committer!" ... "oh. gee. yay. I'm > so enthused. what a difference. NOT." > That hasn't been the reaction at all of new committers I've seen voted into the various projects I've been a part of. Nor was it my reaction when I became a committer on HBase and Hadoop a number of years back - in both cases I was quite proud that the existing group of committers had deemed my knowledge of the code sufficient to review and guide work by new contributors. Todd > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 12:06 AM, Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> > wrote: > > > I see the essence of what it means to be a committer. Being trusted to > > both do the correct action and be willing to listen objectively to > > criticism. In an CTR project it is clear to me that the point where a > > project grants Committership should be the point where the PMC wants to > > treat an individual's contribution as CTR rather than RTC. How does an > RTC > > project make THAT important decision? > > > > Regards, > > Dave > > > > -- > Todd Lipcon > Software Engineer, Cloudera >
