It's true, I see no reason why it should be any trouble adding new committers. At this point, we can surely get 3 people to vote, because of all the commotion that's occurred. If I contact him directly, I could probably get Berin Loritsch to vote too.
JMeter has always been very small. I don't remember ever having 3 active committers for more than a couple weeks at a time. As a result, I've never really worried too much about the Apache rules for decision making and the like. Calling for votes no something has often resulted in no response. Responses from PMC members has also been inconsistent. So sometimes, it has felt that JMeter was an Apache project in name only. Moving elsewhwere would to have the advantage of decreasing administrative overhead. But, I think we should how these latest actions pan out at this point before making that decision. -Mike On 10 Dec 2002 at 13:38, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On Tue, 10 Dec 2002, Conor MacNeill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > One problem that we face is that currently only Mike and one other > > committer appear to be "around" to vote on new committers. > > Looking at Jim's or Sam's committers page, Jon is listed as committer ;-) > > > Is there any mechanism to allow new committers to be added in these > > circumstances? Could the PMC approve these new committers? > > I think so. The PMC approves initial committers for new projects as > well. > > > Mike has suggested that perhaps by its nature JMeter tends to > > attract developers only for the period in which they need to use its > > capabilities and they then tend to move on. > > This is probably true for most codebases. > > > Given that is the case, he thinks that maybe sourceforge may be a > > better place to develop the project. > > Why? > > Mike, would the Jakarta Commons work for you? > > Stefan -- Michael Stover [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo IM: mstover_ya ICQ: 152975688 AIM: mstover777 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
