Noted, thanks. -- Andrei
On 4/3/14, 7:33 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Apr 2, 2014, at 9:17 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu <[email protected]> wrote:
(Also I think I've been overly politically correct about this. All this voting
should happen if we're removing, not adding, a committer.)
Regarding voting on inclusion, I don't think it's overly burdensome when adding
a person to request comments. I don't think we need a vote, but just objections
if any exist.
I seriously doubt we would ever have a situation where a person has impressed
anyone on the team, especially Andrei, to the point of warranting inclusion in
the group, and somehow would elicit objections from anyone already on the team.
But there is something to be said about giving a forum for the process to allow
the team authority on whom it chooses for its members.
Given the nature of git and the fact that we can revoke privileges just as easily as
granting them, it doesn't make a whole lot of difference whether we do this either way.
But the sense of "yes, we all approved this guy" is important, even if it's
just a formality. It's also nice as a contributor to have confirmation that the team does
all want you on it :)
Also, given the fact that Facebook is starting to use D more, allowing an
approval process lessens that appearance of conflict-of-interest for those who
would care about that.
-Steve
_______________________________________________
phobos mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
_______________________________________________
phobos mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
