> > >What I said was "but I believe that this group (as noted on the members >meeting this Tuesday) is giving away committer privileges a little bit too >easily"... I don't think that sound like "this is a resolution passed by >members" or "this is a guideline given at that meeting"... > >To me it sounds like what happened: we were talking about what it does take >for one person to become a committer and/or a member, expectations and >bars... That's it... If I was misunderstood, well, sorry... > > I understand, I still think thats something that if you are a voting committer of the Tomcat dev group you should -1 and argue your point there. I do not think the PMC should override the decision of the Tomcat group simply because you disagree with them. I feel that the Tomcat guys have been at this awhile and if you trust them to be on the server, well then I guess you trust them to decide who should be on the server.
>It is of general interest (IMO) because becoming a committer entitles you >not only to a little peaceful heaven in your own little project, but >entitles you (and, frankly, obliges you) to be a part of the Jakarta >Community at large. You will be given (for example) access to the >jakarta-commons CVS repo (if that didn't change lately), it entitles you to >put your name on the website and to elect the PMC. > > I regard that as "enfranchisement" in the federation or confederation that is Jakarta. If the Tomcat community trusts your judgement enough to make you a voting committer in that project, and Jakarta trusts the Tomcat community enough to make it a member project, then you hence are enfranchised in the federal or confederal (sp?) union that is Jakarta. >And at large, it entitles you to have an @apache.org email address, to have >access to our live servers, entitles you to be a part of the whole Apache >family... > you're point being? > > >I'm sorry, but I believe that any time a new committer is made, we _need_ to >put some thought in what we're "giving away", we're not just letting a guy >commit to our CVS server... > > And I don't disagree with you. Its a "states rights" argument. You're questioning whether this community has the right to bring someone into the inner circle of the community. I say its their right. Yes it affects us all, but it is their right as a project to do so. Its like if you have a child, he'll likely be accepted as a citizen of the country that you are a citizen of, yet your countrymen probably are not consulted in the process, though it has an affect on them. I regard that as freedom. The POI project has been hard to give folks commit access and soft for others. Its been up to the judgement of the committers. Sometimes we've been easier on some because they fit well into the community and were working on an essential piece of the project, other times we've not been so easy (code quality concerns, importance of a feature to the community). We've done so with the consent of our Advisor and with occasional (all positive) input from other members of the greater Jakarta community, but with next to absolute freedom. We've executed this with care and always stressed the importance of the agreement and I think that is the trust instilled in us as a project. I'd hate to see that taken away from Tomcat. I've seen other project be more careless, its up to you to inform them of the magnitude of the situation, not argue that their rights should be restricted. I think you should argue your case on tomcat-dev and maybe see if others will follow. I don't think its appropriate to argue it here, or more accurately, I feel strongly that no action should be taken outside of the Tomcat community on this issue. =-Andy >Anyway, that's what I think.... > > Pier > > >-- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
