In my opinion no, everyone has strengths and weaknesses and you don't have to be able to do everything to become a committer. Its more about trust. If someones speciality is doc they may never touch any code but they'd still need commit access to update the website. This is the way the Apache WS project works anyway, there's lots of sub-projects of the WS project ( http://ws.apache.org/) but any WS committer has commit access to all of them. I think this works fine but it doesn't have to be that way, if we as a community decide we want tighter controls we could probably do that.
...ant On 7/4/06, Geoffrey Winn < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I assume that a committer, once elected, is active in the entire code base. This bothers me a little. I currently work entirely in the C++ implementation and do almost nothing with the Java code. I think I could easily reach a situation where I have done all the things required of a committer (whatever they turn out to be) in C++ land and nevertheless be largely ignorant of the Java code base. In fairness, I can also see the mirror image happening to someone else. Does that matter? Geoff. On 04/07/06, Jim Marino < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Also forgot to mention the wiki is a god place to add scenarios you > are interested in either from an end-user perspective or as potential > implementor: > > http://wiki.apache.org/ws/Tuscany/TuscanyJava/Scenarios > > Jim > > On Jul 4, 2006, at 3:44 AM, Jim Marino wrote: > > > JIRA also can handle documentation, website, etc. "bugs" and > > "enhancements" if you want the proverbial notches on the bedpost ;-) > > > > On Jul 4, 2006, at 3:38 AM, kelvin goodson wrote: > > > >> +1 from me on taking into account diverse activities, but I must > >> declare a > >> vested interest. > >> I'm encouraged by this discussion, since I'd like to become a > >> committer, and > >> have had that niggling feeling that if it's notches on the jira > >> bedpost that > >> are the primary measure, then it's going to take a while longer > >> than I had > >> hoped. I have been doing a number of things which are material > >> contributions which haven't resulted in direct code updates. > >> > >> Regards, Kelvin. > >> > >> On 7/3/06, Jim Marino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> On Jul 3, 2006, at 1:35 AM, ant elder wrote: > >>> > >>> > There's a number of people who've been contributing patches to > >>> > Tuscany for > >>> > some time now so we should start thinking about what it takes > >>> to be > >>> > made a > >>> > committer. > >>> > > >>> > An old Incubator webpage had this to say (the page isn't available > >>> > right > >>> > now): > >>> > > >>> > "If a developer has contributed a significant number of high- > >>> quality > >>> > patches, is interested in continuing the contribution, has > >>> > demonstrated the > >>> > ability to work well with others under the Apache guidelines, it > >>> > may be > >>> > proposed to grant that developer commit access." > >>> > > >>> > I think it should take a bit more than code to be made a > >>> committer - > >>> > participation in mailing list discussions, the weekly IRC chats, > >>> > votes, and > >>> > things like that. > >>> Agree with being more than just code. One thing though I would > >>> say is > >>> people shouldn't be required to do all things, i.e. some may not be > >>> able to make IRC or just not feel comfortable "speaking up". I do > >>> think, though, it's really important to participate in things other > >>> than code such as the mailing lists. I do however, think we should > >>> weight things towards "material" contributions (not just code, it > >>> could be documentation, the web site, etc.) when deciding on > >>> commitership. > >>> > >>> > And its not just code, high-quality patches could include > >>> > things for documentation or web site. Right now i think it > >>> > shouldn't be to > >>> > hard to become a committer, if someone has been demonstrating an > >>> > interest in > >>> > the project for a while we should encourage that. > >>> > > >>> It seems to me there are two types of commiters. Those that make > >>> substantial contributions over a shorter period of time and those > >>> that make smaller, incremental contributions over a longer-time > >>> frame. I think we should accommodate both and perhaps outline it in > >>> documentation that could be put on the web site. For newbies coming > >>> to the project, it would be nice to be able to read what was > >>> expected > >>> to become a commiter. > >>> > >>> Ant, are you willing to take a stab at doing this since you've been > >>> making some good points w.r.t the community aspects of commitership? > >>> > >>> Jim > >>> > >>> > What do others think? > >>> > > >>> > ...ant > >>> > >>> > >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> - > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Best Regards > >> Kelvin Goodson > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
