A recent press article suggested that this project had not had any new committers since the project started. This is false. But it would be hard to tell that, looking at our mailing list or website.
So far we've been quiet about new committers. We have the votes, process the paper work, etc., on the ooo-private list. Some Apache projects announce each new committer to their main mailing list. Others don't. We're received mixed advice from our mentors. IMHO, we want to avoid two errors, at the extremes: 1) A public announcement note for new committers that is read as being too congratulatory, one that makes those who are not committers (or not yet committers) feel less appreciated. 2) Total lack of any acknowledgement of new committers/PPMC that leads observers to believe that new committers are chosen in a secret ceremony involving ceremonial robes, oaths, and animal sacrifices. An announcement of a new committer should not be surprising. It should confirm what any regular observer of the mailing list already knows, namely that person X is actively involved in the project and is making high quality contributions. So on one hand, acknowledging a new committer should not tell you anything that you don't already know. On the other hand, there is reinforcement value to stating what we know, especially for newer members of the project, i.e., the project's future committers. By analogy, I've worked in situations where job promotions were given secretly, and people were shy to ever speak of them. It suggested that the company could not bear the scrutiny of seeing the inequity of hoiw promotions were given out. And I've worked places where promotions were announced widely, with a summary of the person's recent contributions, reinforcing to the entire team the kinds of contributions that could get them -- some day -- a similar promotion. If we believe that we're doing a good job at selecting new committers then we should want this to be known. Transparency shows the fairness of the process. Obviously the context here at Apache is not the same. But I think the choices are analogous. Personally, I'm in favor of a modest announcement to the ooo-dev list after a new committer has been elected and have submitted the iCLA. What do you think? -Rob
