>I nominated quite a few of the current tomcat commiters, and >each of them made important contributions to tomcat. I used the >same 'standards' that Bill used when proposing Dan. > >I believe we deserve some explanation from the 'members', I'm >quite unhappy about this whole issue. If there are some new >quantitative standards for becoming a commiter ( or a member ) >we should know about.
Even if I vote +1 for both tomcat recent commiters, Benoit and Dan, I could understand Pier objections. Benoit and Dan are new to tomcat-dev (less than 1 month) and mail-archive reports 32 refs to Benoit and 17 to Dan. http://www.mail-archive.com/cgi-bin/htsearch?config=tomcat-dev_jakarta_apache_org&restrict=&exclude=&words=Denis+Benoit http://www.mail-archive.com/cgi-bin/htsearch?config=tomcat-dev_jakarta_apache_org&restrict=&exclude=&words=Dan+Sandberg But they were on tomcat-user for at least 1 year. There is many factors which determine if someone could became commiter, proposition, code, patches participation in thread, user-support and duration. And I agree with Pier that not all factors reach a 'critical level'. BTW, I think that a mandatory factor is duration, people should be granted to commiter level after a certain time of presence and activity in developper list. And that's why I understand Pier objections.... PS: Please don't turn that thread in flam-war. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
