On Tue, 2002-05-28 at 17:36, Leo Simons wrote: > On Tue, 2002-05-28 at 14:20, Andrew C. Oliver wrote: > > I totally disagree with everything you just said. > > Uhm, I think you disagree with the idea "we should have > 'developers/contributors' with CVS access who are not committers". I'm > not sure whether I support that idea yet. > > You also disagree with the other stuff I said? > > > I do NOT think developers should be granted CVS access without voting > > rights. Thats a cop out. That says "Gee we trust you in CVS but don't > > want to give you the rights to control your work or give you any > > ownership in what you do". If they are frequent enough committers to > > require CVS access...then they deserve the rights there under. > > Missing the point I made that there might be people out there that want > some of the rights that come with committer status, not caring about > having all of them, while not wanting all of the duties that come with > committer status. >
I want a million dollars with no responsibilities such as paying taxes or any of that stuff. With rights come responsibilities, such is life. > Heck, I'll probably submit more than a few patches to centipede in the > future; people will probably get tired of applying them and they might > ask me to become a committer, to which I will say "no thanks" as I feel > I have have no time to make that commitment. It'll still be easier for > both the committers and me if I still get CVS access. > Centipede is not a Jakarta project, and if the voting rules for centipede are documented, I missed the link. I think for the moment its either common law or "understood" because nearly everyone there is a committer on some Apache project somewhere. > I'm not saying we should allow it, just that there's two sides to the > story. > I'd in fact -1 the idea of giving you CVS access without agreeing to be a committer. Krysalis (from what I can tell) actually has a slightly different type of committership. One is a committer to all projects (meaning I get to vote on Wings and Centipede both). I think I may be (there) an excellent example of the type of "committer" that Pier talks about. I've actually committed 0 code to Wings or Centipede. All of my work has been in setup, publicising, cross OS-testing, and well lots of little things that aren't code but that well the project might not be where it is today had I not done them. > Case can be made that since putting something in CVS is putting > something up for lazy majority vote (and I subscribe to that), this is > not a good 'use case'. But what is wrong with a role for people that > have the option to propose something for a lazy majority vote, and then > no right/obligation to actually vote on that 'something' or anything > else? > I think with rights comes responsibility. "Gee I'd like to dump my code here and not bother with the community".... I want a million dollars without bothering with earning it or the taxes or jailtime or whatever... -Andy > g'night, > > - Leo > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- http://www.superlinksoftware.com - software solutions for business http://jakarta.apache.org/poi - Excel/Word/OLE 2 Compound Document in Java http://krysalis.sourceforge.net/centipede - the best build/project structure a guy/gal could have! - Make Ant simple on complex Projects! The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote. -Ambassador Kosh -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>