"Leo Simons" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I believe we deserve some explanation from the 'members', I'm
>>> quite unhappy about this whole issue. If there are some new
>>> quantitative standards for becoming a commiter ( or a member )
>>> we should know about.
>>
>> The ASF members didn't impose any standard. Read my mail on _why_ I CCed the
>> members list (I just explained it, the "issue" of bars and such was brought
>> up, meaning that there's interest) and I'd like to do some cross-project
>> pollination....
>
> While I think we should recognise that each project can set its own
> standards up to a degree, becoming a committer also entitles you to some
> jakarta-wide priveledges, which means there should be an (albeit
> unspoken) agreement between projects on what is the "minimum". So I
> agree this is a valuable discussion.
Exactly my point. We're not just letting a guy commit on our CVS. We're
entitling him of privileges which are going to modify the balance or the
project where he's committing (tomcat), the umbrella where his project is
hosted (jakarta) and the foundation itself....
>> Dan made some excellent contribution to the SSIServlet, great, but on my
>> archive, I can see that he posted 7 times to the list, and the first time
>> exactly 24 days ago.
>
> I do not think this has to mean he is not a member of the developers
> community per se.
No, absolutely not. If someone could tell me _something_more_ about Dan,
apart from what I can see with my own eyes (7 emails, 1 patch and a request
to be made a committer), well, I'll be happy to drop my vote... Just LET ME
KNOW HIM! :)
> For example, Avalon is tightly coupled to Cocoon. A lot of stuff in
> Avalon has been brought over from cocoon. There could be a member who
> has been working on that code for a long time, using avalon for a long
> time, and now is becoming a maintainer of that code, while only ever
> having posted 3 messages to the avalon list before. I can see how this
> person could qualify for committer status.
It's like when we "incorporate" new projects... Ceki was given the committer
status "as is", he didn't have to "prove" himself to be able/worthy of
working on the code he wrote :) (I keep talking about
> However, the following quote alone
>
> "He has already put in a great deal of work in re-factoring the
> SSIServlet in Tomcat 4.x, and seems to be willing to further contribute
> to working on this."
>
> doesn't imo provide enough of a case to grant this person (who I don't
> know anything about, btw) committer status.
Neither I know anything about him... How can I +1 him if I don't know?
> I'm guessing that there are other unspoken qualities about him /
> assurances of his commitment that made some of the tomcat committers
> feel this person in fact should be granted committer status.
I hope... Up until now (funny enough) the only "evidence" I gathered on him
is that he's also a member of the tomcat-user mailing list, but unluckily, I
haven't had time to go in the archives and read (yet).
> When all
> committers know about these other facts, everything is fine. When they
> do not (which I assume happened in this case), a -1 is in order, and the
> proposal can be ellaborated upon, after which the -1 can become a +1.
Indeed... I don't want to close any door anywhere.
> If the guy who voted -1 still feels it is a valid vote after this
> ellaboration and following discussion, well, the candidate will probably
> understand the reasoning, and if he truely does deserve committer
> status, it will be granted to him in time, no?
A -1 always have to come with a "motive"... My motive for my -1 is: I don't
know the guy. And usually (at least in the old days), a -1 means, and now
you make me change my mind... A -1 is a challenge, and god knows how many
good things came out of -1s... :)
> So I think there is no reason to be very unhappy with the current
> process we have: no project is even remotely likely to be destroyed by
> committers not worth the status, and no potential committer with a thick
> enough skin to survive at jakarta in the long run is turned away.
Nope, absolutely not... I just want to get to know who Dan is, and raise
some awareness / discuss about how/why we should accept new committers in.
Pier
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
