You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@jakarta.apache.org by co...@covalent.net on 2002/05/24 17:00:13 UTC
Re: [VOTE] New Committer Dan Sandberg
That leaves me perplexed for several reasons...
First, it's the first time I see a commiter rejected - without any
reference to the quality and importance of his contribution, but some
new "member's" standard we don't know about. Dan put the SSI system in a
decent shape, that's similar with the contributions many others have
done to become commiters.
Second, if the 'members' and/or PMC has anything to say, I believe
it should do it directly and in a public forum. Beeing talked about
behind our back is not very comfortable.
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.
Costin
On Fri, 24 May 2002, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> "Bill Barker" <wb...@wilshire.com> wrote:
>
> > I'd like to propose Dan Sandberg (x at cs.stanford.edu) as a new Tomcat
> > committer. He has already put in a great deal of work in re-factoring the
> > SSIServlet in Tomcat 4.x, and seems to be willing to further contribute to
> > working on this.
>
> -1.... Sorry, but 7 messages posted to the -dev mailing list, and two
> patches don't make him reach my bar...
>
> I hate to be the PITA, as always, and I don't have anything against Dan or
> the patches he submitted to SSIServlet, but I believe that this group (as
> noted on the members meeting this Tuesday) is giving away committer
> privileges a little bit too easily...
>
> That's my $ 0.02 anyway...
>
> Pier
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Criteria for commit access
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
>
>
> Having said this, there is nothing wrong with discussing criteria for
> proposing committers. In a conversation I had with Stefano Mazzocchi a
> long time ago, he outlined the reasons for his liberal policy (for
> granting commit access). I tend to oscillate between a liberal policy
> and a conservative one. A discussion on this topic is very well
> deserved imho.
>
And thats fine, I just think it should be up to the community in the
end. Providing non-binding guidence is good, but restricting the rights
of the Tomcat community is a very unfree and open attitude.
> --
> Ceki
>
> ps: The tomcat developers should complete the vote on Dan's
> candidacy. His candidacy should not be hostage to this discussion.
Agreed, and lets try and change the subject of all replying threads,
think how the poor guy must feel to fall victim to the general @ Jakarta
trial by incident. He just submits some patches and suddenly his name
is at the top of Google with a bunch of guys arguing whether he should
be admitted. Lets make this subject what it is. (and remove his name
from it)
-Andy
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Criteria for commit access; was: [VOTE] New Committer Dan
Sandberg
Posted by Ceki Gülcü <ce...@qos.ch>.
At 10:07 24.05.2002 -0700, costinm@covalent.net wrote:
>On Fri, 24 May 2002, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>
> > Personally, I feel this discussion belongs solely on the tomcat list and
> > is up to the committers of Tomcat to resolve. If the Tomcat community
> > feels the bar should be raised, let them raise it. If they do not, then
> > it shall not be raised. I don't feel it should be up to anyone else.
>
>I CC: general because the PMC was on the Cc:
>
>I think any discussion that is related with the PMC should be on general.
>( except exceptions ).
>
>It seems the request to raise the bar comes from the 'members', at least
>that's what I can conclude from Pier's mail - and thus is of general
>interest.
Absolutely.
It is crystal clear that the decision to grant committer access to a
project lies solely with the project itself, not the PMC nor the ASF
board. (I mean "project" in the Ant, Avalon sense, not the
Jakarta sense.)
Having said this, there is nothing wrong with discussing criteria for
proposing committers. In a conversation I had with Stefano Mazzocchi a
long time ago, he outlined the reasons for his liberal policy (for
granting commit access). I tend to oscillate between a liberal policy
and a conservative one. A discussion on this topic is very well deserved imho.
>Costin
--
Ceki
ps: The tomcat developers should complete the vote on Dan's
candidacy. His candidacy should not be hostage to this discussion.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE] New Committer Dan Sandberg
Posted by Kurt Schrader <ks...@engin.umich.edu>.
On Fri, 24 May 2002, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> >And at large, it entitles you to have an @apache.org email address, to have
> >access to our live servers, entitles you to be a part of the whole Apache
> >family...
> >
> you're point being?
I think that the point is that when you gain an @apache.org account,
you're not just getting a throwaway free e-mail account, you're becoming a
representative of Apache and the organization. I think that it's akin
to your work e-mail address, as there's a certain amount (at least in my
head) of responsibility attached to possessing it and using it properly.
-Kurt
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Criteria for commit access
Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.
"Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Andy, not everyone grew up in Texas! :) I don't eat beef anymore (you know
>> mad-cow disease and smallpox in the UK)
>>
> Dern Europeans ain' speaking proper 'merican. Anyhow, just wait around
> and you'll catch me speaking Spanish too.
No estas problema, chico! :)
>> From general@ I want feedback as well, we're talking about it, several
>> people responded, so I'm trying to challenge my own -1 with comments not
>> only from the restricted group of Tomcat...
>>
> Okay...thats fine. This Andy alarm was triggered because I thought you
> were looking for creating a more top down organization.
Nope, I'm actually trying to figure out how commit access should be given,
but that will come later in another email...
>> Do you realize that when you give access to someone in _your_ community,
>> you're opening a backdoor that entitles that person _ALSO_ to other
>> "privileges" and that your decision will or could, at the end, affect other
>> people that you don't even know?
>>
> Yes, again, back to the you're right to breed example... Jakarta is a
> community of communities. The power flows bottom up. Not top down.
> (in general, according to my limited viewpoint of the world)
Correct, indeed, that's why we elect people from the bottom to the top, for
example, to sit on the PMC, or (since I just closed the vote right now) on
the ASF board...
>> Worthless on the matter of making me change my vote FOR THAT PERSON
>> SPECIFICALLY, maybe. Worthless to the idea of a better structured and
>> integrated Jakarta-as-a-whole community? Hardly.
>>
> I am against a top-down decision process in bringing in new committers.
+1...
> There is such a process for bringing in new projects, and thats
> probably the right thing to do.
Yes, because our infrastructure is limited, and our scope is limited, we're
not SourceForge, right?
> But I'm in no position to know what a
> person has done for Tomcat and whether he should get a vote in Tomcat.
As I'm not in that position for POI...
> As for the fact that that gives him some limited status and control in
> the project as a whole, you're looking at that wrong in my opinion. Its
> Tomcat's right to grant him that power. If Tomcat is misusing that
> right, its up to you as a Tomcat committer with a binding vote to stop
> them. I think you did the right thing.
But there might be cases in which we _want_ that to happen (I'll detail in a
further email I'm working on).
>> Just one question, have you ever voted -1 on a committer? (and not just to
>> you, but to every committer on this list).
>>
> I'm a sneaky b*stard. I never propose anyone on list until I ask them
> offlist if he wants to be a committer. I apply the most patches and so
> I generally propose most of the committers (based on how bad you've
> inundated me with patches, I consider making you a committer a
> punishment for making me do too much work :-p). I have told people "no
> you can't be a committer" or "you can ask but I'll vote -1" before, but
> thats as far as it went.
That's good, you do most of the work, you _know_ the person you're dealing
with, you can propose him as a committer or not... You know what's going
on... Frankly in my case I didn't...
> I have been tempted once, there was one person who I thought really
> should be made a committer, but I chose to abstain from the vote because
> I was not prepared to air out the reasons why.
That's what happened last week with another committer vote on tomcat-dev
(same story), I didn't vote...
> If I felt someone was being made a committer too quickly I certainly
> would do the same as you and -1 them.
So you (at the end) agree :) Good! :) (And given me some valuable point for
the next step)...
Pier
--
[Perl] combines all the worst aspects of C and Lisp: a billion of different
sublanguages in one monolithic executable. It combines the power of C with
the readability of PostScript. [Jamie Zawinski - DNA Lounge - San Francisco]
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Criteria for commit access
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
>
>
>Andy, not everyone grew up in Texas! :) I don't eat beef anymore (you know
>mad-cow disease and smallpox in the UK)
>
>
Dern Europeans ain' speaking proper 'merican. Anyhow, just wait around
and you'll catch me speaking Spanish too.
>>>
>>>
>>I do not think the PMC should intervene just because the others
>>disagree. This looks like an issue that is totally restricted to the
>>Tomcat community. I don't understand the issue. The system is working.
>>. .why raise a fuss elsewhere. You have an issue with the standards and
>>you've vetoed the committership. This seems to me to be exactly what is
>>supposed to happen...
>>
>>
>
>Because it is the very first time that someone -1s a new committer. I've
>never seen it happening, and I want more feedback from all the different
>possible sources ever...
>
>I CCed members because I esteem the judgement and knowledge of every single
>one of them and I had _very_ good feedback from them, I CCed PMC because I'm
>utterly stupid and still I don't remember to use general@ for
>trivial/crossproject matters (and I welcome Costin's correction in
>forwarding it to the appropriate list)...
>
>>>From general@ I want feedback as well, we're talking about it, several
>people responded, so I'm trying to challenge my own -1 with comments not
>only from the restricted group of Tomcat...
>
>
Okay...thats fine. This Andy alarm was triggered because I thought you
were looking for creating a more top down organization.
>>>
>>>
>>So the system works! Good news!
>>
>>
>
>I still don't follow....
>
>
You veto'd. That means the system work. The standard is upheld.
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>Right but it should be up to ya'll tomcatters to work out your standards
>>amonst yerselves. Thats my only issue.
>>
>>
>
>Nope, because if I vote a committer in, I give him access to the Tomcat CVS
>repo, but I also entitle him to vote for the friggin' next PMC, and _YOU_ my
>friend, might not like my choice, right?
>
>
Just like if we were citizens of the same country and you brought a
child into the world. That doesn't mean I should have a say in the
matter. As I understand it, the PMC is here to serve the needs of the
different communities, not vice versa. So Its perfectly logical for the
Tomcat folks to decide making someone a committer is in their best
interests and then by extension granting that person those rights to
vote their individiual interests as a way of further contributing to
Tomcat.
Philisopically this is federalism, or more closely "confederalism".
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>But its up to the Tomcat community. The system works. No action is
>>needed aside from that you've taken on the Tomcat list.
>>
>>
>
>Maybe for _you_, not for _me_... Being utterly stupid, completely
>irresponsible, and definitely insecure, I need other people comments, not on
>the particular issue of _the_guy_ in se, but on a more general issue on
>_why_ I voted that way.
>
>
My opinion (just my 2c that SHOULD not count for any more than Pier is
interested) -- the system works. If you felt uncomforable with this
person being a commiter, you should have voted -1.
>Ok, I should have voted -1 and then raised this all stuff in a _different_
>email to general, OK OK, I foobared up once more, but you guys should be
>used to it by now...
>
>
;-)
>
>
>Do you realize that when you give access to someone in _your_ community,
>you're opening a backdoor that entitles that person _ALSO_ to other
>"privileges" and that your decision will or could, at the end, affect other
>people that you don't even know?
>
>
Yes, again, back to the you're right to breed example... Jakarta is a
community of communities. The power flows bottom up. Not top down.
(in general, according to my limited viewpoint of the world)
>
>
>Worthless on the matter of making me change my vote FOR THAT PERSON
>SPECIFICALLY, maybe. Worthless to the idea of a better structured and
>integrated Jakarta-as-a-whole community? Hardly.
>
>
I am against a top-down decision process in bringing in new committers.
There is such a process for bringing in new projects, and thats
probably the right thing to do. But I'm in no position to know what a
person has done for Tomcat and whether he should get a vote in Tomcat.
As for the fact that that gives him some limited status and control in
the project as a whole, you're looking at that wrong in my opinion. Its
Tomcat's right to grant him that power. If Tomcat is misusing that
right, its up to you as a Tomcat committer with a binding vote to stop
them. I think you did the right thing.
>>No, you voted -1. They have a right to try and convince you to change
>>you vote, but the issue is decided.
>>
>>
>
>The issue is not decided until the vote ends, and that means 3 days past the
>request for vote...
>
>
And you've voted -1. They should try to convince you otherwise, but
*shrug*.
>
>
>Just one question, have you ever voted -1 on a committer? (and not just to
>you, but to every committer on this list).
>
>
I'm a sneaky b*stard. I never propose anyone on list until I ask them
offlist if he wants to be a committer. I apply the most patches and so
I generally propose most of the committers (based on how bad you've
inundated me with patches, I consider making you a committer a
punishment for making me do too much work :-p). I have told people "no
you can't be a committer" or "you can ask but I'll vote -1" before, but
thats as far as it went.
I have been tempted once, there was one person who I thought really
should be made a committer, but I chose to abstain from the vote because
I was not prepared to air out the reasons why.
If I felt someone was being made a committer too quickly I certainly
would do the same as you and -1 them.
-Andy
> Pier
>
>--
>[Perl] combines all the worst aspects of C and Lisp: a billion of different
>sublanguages in one monolithic executable. It combines the power of C with
>the readability of PostScript. [Jamie Zawinski - DNA Lounge - San Francisco]
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Criteria for commit access
Posted by Morgan Delagrange <md...@yahoo.com>.
> Just one question, have you ever voted -1 on a committer? (and not just to
> you, but to every committer on this list).
>
> Pier
>
Yes I'm several days behind in email. :) Catching up now...
I voted -0 on a couple of committers once because I didn't feel that their
qualifications were well-specified. They were nominated for Commons, but
they had made either insubsubstantial or nonexistent (can't recall which) to
the Commons mailing lists.
It was very similar circumstances. I was uncomfortable with the credentials
supplied, Costin, Remy and Jean-frederic clarified the proposed committers'
status in Jakarta, and I retracted my objection. You can see part of the
thread here:
http://www.mail-archive.com/commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org/msg03817.html
If I recall correctly, there was in my view a little unnecessary huffiness
in the discussion (like Pier, I just wanted clarification on who they were)
but I think it turned out satisfactorily in the end.
- Morgan
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Criteria for commit access
Posted by Leo Simons <le...@apache.org>.
> Just one question, have you ever voted -1 on a committer? (and not just to
> you, but to every committer on this list).
I've abstained, informally (off-list, that is) from voting, once. The
guy in question had been active in a part of our project but I hadn't
been following on that at all, so I felt incapable to judge.
(ducks in fear of flaming swords coming down from the sky at blazing
speed to strike him dead for committing (pun intended) this terrible
sin)
- Leo
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Criteria for commit access
Posted by co...@covalent.net.
On Fri, 24 May 2002, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> > Right but it should be up to ya'll tomcatters to work out your standards
> > amonst yerselves. Thats my only issue.
>
> Nope, because if I vote a committer in, I give him access to the Tomcat CVS
> repo, but I also entitle him to vote for the friggin' next PMC, and _YOU_ my
> friend, might not like my choice, right?
I think in much simpler terms - if someone writes code and does work that
is important for a project, he deserves to have the same rights as all
other people who write code and do work.
Our goal is to get people involved and to get them to spend their free
time and weekends helping us make the best container. If someone shows
the potential of making tomcat better, I would vote for him, even
if I don't agree with his 'political' choices.
If one quarter of the new commiters make 1/2 the contributions that people
like Sam Ruby did - I'm quite happy.
If this ( jakarta or tomcat ) into a elitist group that believes it is
better than the rest of the world - I would rather spend my time
contributing to sourceforge projects.
But arguing that someone shouldn't be a commiter because he may elect
someone we don't like in a PMC or because we don't like the portion
of the code he is interested in - that's unfair and wrong ( IMHO ).
Beeing a tomcat ( or jakarta ) developer is not easy. You have to spend
your time doing work and getting flames in return. You don't own
the code you write. Up until recently we couldn't even vote for
the PMC, and have little influence over the ASF decisions ( who is the
owner of the code we write ).
Costin
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Criteria for commit access
Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.
"Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org> wrote:
>> That's what I did... I posted my -1 over there, detailed why, and I'm
>> waiting for someone to write me back something about it... So far, nothing
>> worth making me change my vote (meaning, nothing more than what was already
>> there).
>
> So that means its vetoed...what's your beef?
Andy, not everyone grew up in Texas! :) I don't eat beef anymore (you know
mad-cow disease and smallpox in the UK)
>> No, my vote is binding... It's not a majority... I don't need the PMC to
>> block the thing from happening... They might need the PMC to unblock the
>> situation since I'm a stubborn donkey! :)
>>
> I do not think the PMC should intervene just because the others
> disagree. This looks like an issue that is totally restricted to the
> Tomcat community. I don't understand the issue. The system is working.
> . .why raise a fuss elsewhere. You have an issue with the standards and
> you've vetoed the committership. This seems to me to be exactly what is
> supposed to happen...
Because it is the very first time that someone -1s a new committer. I've
never seen it happening, and I want more feedback from all the different
possible sources ever...
I CCed members because I esteem the judgement and knowledge of every single
one of them and I had _very_ good feedback from them, I CCed PMC because I'm
utterly stupid and still I don't remember to use general@ for
trivial/crossproject matters (and I welcome Costin's correction in
forwarding it to the appropriate list)...
>From general@ I want feedback as well, we're talking about it, several
people responded, so I'm trying to challenge my own -1 with comments not
only from the restricted group of Tomcat...
>> I trust _some_ of them on the server, as I believe not all of them trust me
>> (talking about code)... The only thing that _noone_ yet wrote to me on the
>> tomcat list saying "no, you should change your vote in a +1 or a 0 because
>> and because" makes me feel that (probably) I was right...
>>
>> Actually on the same topic, few other people raised my same concern and
>> agreed (although not posting another -1 vote)... We're all civilized and
>> stuff :) :) :) :)
>>
> So the system works! Good news!
I still don't follow....
>> I normally trust the my co-committers on Tomcat, yes. Best coders I've seen
>> on this planet (of course apart notable exceptions, but that's another
>>
> bzzzt wrong. :-p We sucked up the best coders on the planet for the
> POI project ;-)
I know... We dogs hang around in all the different projects :)
>> story). But trusting them doesn't need to mean that I'm going to jump of a
>> cliff if they all do it, right?
>>
> Right but it should be up to ya'll tomcatters to work out your standards
> amonst yerselves. Thats my only issue.
Nope, because if I vote a committer in, I give him access to the Tomcat CVS
repo, but I also entitle him to vote for the friggin' next PMC, and _YOU_ my
friend, might not like my choice, right?
>> The only information I have to vote +1 for this guy on MY project (tomcat)
>> are a handful of email, and 3 weeks of history... I'm sorry, but I need to
>> know someone before I can honestly say "he's my buddy and I want to have him
>> on my project"
>>
> If I were a tomcat committer I'd vote with you, but I rarely understand
> those Tomcat guys. Who DOES understand those Tomcat guys anyhow ;-).
Certainly I don't ! :)
>>>> And at large, it entitles you to have an @apache.org email address, to have
>>>> access to our live servers, entitles you to be a part of the whole Apache
>>>> family...
>>>>
>>> you're point being?
>>>
>> ???? My point being that there's something behind having a name on the CVS
>> "avail" file and an entry in /etc/passwd... :)
>>
> But its up to the Tomcat community. The system works. No action is
> needed aside from that you've taken on the Tomcat list.
Maybe for _you_, not for _me_... Being utterly stupid, completely
irresponsible, and definitely insecure, I need other people comments, not on
the particular issue of _the_guy_ in se, but on a more general issue on
_why_ I voted that way.
Ok, I should have voted -1 and then raised this all stuff in a _different_
email to general, OK OK, I foobared up once more, but you guys should be
used to it by now...
>>> And I don't disagree with you. Its a "states rights" argument. You're
>>> questioning whether this community has the right to bring someone into
>>> the inner circle of the community. I say its their right. Yes it
>>> affects us all, but it is their right as a project to do so.
>>>
>> Indeed... It is. I'm not arguing with that. I wouldn't do it for POI (for
>> example), I trust your judgment, as a committer, that you will only let
>> other good people in our community... As you trust me to bring only good
>> people in the community, right?
>>
> Right, my question is now why this is being brought to general @ jakarta
> and cross posted when its an internal issue to Tomcat. If we need a
> webpage to give guidence to the communities as to how and when to make
> someone a committer, well thats fine, but I wouldn't like to see the PMC
> tell us who we can and can't make committers based on only what
> information flows up. Those decisions belong rightly to the communities.
Do you realize that when you give access to someone in _your_ community,
you're opening a backdoor that entitles that person _ALSO_ to other
"privileges" and that your decision will or could, at the end, affect other
people that you don't even know?
>> Now, I seriously don't know the guy we're supposed to vote in, really, and
>> FWIW, he should be working with me on my same codebase... You see the point?
>> I don't know if he's a good person for your (and mine) community...
>>
> I totally (based only on the information you've provided) agree. But I
> also think my opinion should be counted as worthless on the topic.
Worthless on the matter of making me change my vote FOR THAT PERSON
SPECIFICALLY, maybe. Worthless to the idea of a better structured and
integrated Jakarta-as-a-whole community? Hardly.
>> Indeed.. But I was _asked_ to vote him in... You see my point? I trust you
>> for who you let in thru POI...
>>
> No, you voted -1. They have a right to try and convince you to change
> you vote, but the issue is decided.
The issue is not decided until the vote ends, and that means 3 days past the
request for vote...
>> Oh no, Andy... I'm sorry, I think you misunderstood... I am not asking
>> anyone to override anything... I _was_ asked to vote, I voted -1 for my
>> reasons, because I AM a tomcat committer... Hope that clears it :)
>>
> So why post to PMC and general etc? No action is needed. I don't cc
> them everytime I vote for a committer, why if I'm voting against? When
> reading this I thought you were campaigning the PMC and general body of
> jakarta to enforce standards on the communities as to who they can and
> can't let be committers. That triggered the Andy alarm as I don't
> really want them to decide for POI or Lucene who we can and can't make
> committers. If I have an issue I'll take it up with said communities
> and not cross post it to general etc.
Just one question, have you ever voted -1 on a committer? (and not just to
you, but to every committer on this list).
Pier
--
[Perl] combines all the worst aspects of C and Lisp: a billion of different
sublanguages in one monolithic executable. It combines the power of C with
the readability of PostScript. [Jamie Zawinski - DNA Lounge - San Francisco]
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Criteria for commit access
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
>
>
>That's what I did... I posted my -1 over there, detailed why, and I'm
>waiting for someone to write me back something about it... So far, nothing
>worth making me change my vote (meaning, nothing more than what was already
>there).
>
So that means its vetoed...what's your beef?
>No, my vote is binding... It's not a majority... I don't need the PMC to
>block the thing from happening... They might need the PMC to unblock the
>situation since I'm a stubborn donkey! :)
>
>
I do not think the PMC should intervene just because the others
disagree. This looks like an issue that is totally restricted to the
Tomcat community. I don't understand the issue. The system is working.
. .why raise a fuss elsewhere. You have an issue with the standards and
you've vetoed the committership. This seems to me to be exactly what is
supposed to happen...
>I trust _some_ of them on the server, as I believe not all of them trust me
>(talking about code)... The only thing that _noone_ yet wrote to me on the
>tomcat list saying "no, you should change your vote in a +1 or a 0 because
>and because" makes me feel that (probably) I was right...
>
>Actually on the same topic, few other people raised my same concern and
>agreed (although not posting another -1 vote)... We're all civilized and
>stuff :) :) :) :)
>
>
So the system works! Good news!
>I normally trust the my co-committers on Tomcat, yes. Best coders I've seen
>on this planet (of course apart notable exceptions, but that's another
>
bzzzt wrong. :-p We sucked up the best coders on the planet for the
POI project ;-)
>story). But trusting them doesn't need to mean that I'm going to jump of a
>cliff if they all do it, right?
>
>
Right but it should be up to ya'll tomcatters to work out your standards
amonst yerselves. Thats my only issue.
>The only information I have to vote +1 for this guy on MY project (tomcat)
>are a handful of email, and 3 weeks of history... I'm sorry, but I need to
>know someone before I can honestly say "he's my buddy and I want to have him
>on my project"
>
>
If I were a tomcat committer I'd vote with you, but I rarely understand
those Tomcat guys. Who DOES understand those Tomcat guys anyhow ;-).
>
>
>>>And at large, it entitles you to have an @apache.org email address, to have
>>>access to our live servers, entitles you to be a part of the whole Apache
>>>family...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>you're point being?
>>
>>
>
>???? My point being that there's something behind having a name on the CVS
>"avail" file and an entry in /etc/passwd... :)
>
>
But its up to the Tomcat community. The system works. No action is
needed aside from that you've taken on the Tomcat list.
>
>
>>And I don't disagree with you. Its a "states rights" argument. You're
>>questioning whether this community has the right to bring someone into
>>the inner circle of the community. I say its their right. Yes it
>>affects us all, but it is their right as a project to do so.
>>
>>
>
>Indeed... It is. I'm not arguing with that. I wouldn't do it for POI (for
>example), I trust your judgment, as a committer, that you will only let
>other good people in our community... As you trust me to bring only good
>people in the community, right?
>
>
Right, my question is now why this is being brought to general @ jakarta
and cross posted when its an internal issue to Tomcat. If we need a
webpage to give guidence to the communities as to how and when to make
someone a committer, well thats fine, but I wouldn't like to see the PMC
tell us who we can and can't make committers based on only what
information flows up. Those decisions belong rightly to the communities.
>Now, I seriously don't know the guy we're supposed to vote in, really, and
>FWIW, he should be working with me on my same codebase... You see the point?
>I don't know if he's a good person for your (and mine) community...
>
>
I totally (based only on the information you've provided) agree. But I
also think my opinion should be counted as worthless on the topic.
>
>
>Indeed.. But I was _asked_ to vote him in... You see my point? I trust you
>for who you let in thru POI...
>
>
No, you voted -1. They have a right to try and convince you to change
you vote, but the issue is decided.
>
>
>Oh no, Andy... I'm sorry, I think you misunderstood... I am not asking
>anyone to override anything... I _was_ asked to vote, I voted -1 for my
>reasons, because I AM a tomcat committer... Hope that clears it :)
>
>
So why post to PMC and general etc? No action is needed. I don't cc
them everytime I vote for a committer, why if I'm voting against? When
reading this I thought you were campaigning the PMC and general body of
jakarta to enforce standards on the communities as to who they can and
can't let be committers. That triggered the Andy alarm as I don't
really want them to decide for POI or Lucene who we can and can't make
committers. If I have an issue I'll take it up with said communities
and not cross post it to general etc.
-Andy
> Pier
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Criteria for commit access
Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.
"Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> What I said was "but I believe that this group (as noted on the members
>> meeting this Tuesday) is giving away committer privileges a little bit too
>> easily"... I don't think that sound like "this is a resolution passed by
>> members" or "this is a guideline given at that meeting"...
>>
>> To me it sounds like what happened: we were talking about what it does take
>> for one person to become a committer and/or a member, expectations and
>> bars... That's it... If I was misunderstood, well, sorry...
>
> I understand, I still think thats something that if you are a voting
> committer of the Tomcat dev group you should -1 and argue your point
> there.
That's what I did... I posted my -1 over there, detailed why, and I'm
waiting for someone to write me back something about it... So far, nothing
worth making me change my vote (meaning, nothing more than what was already
there).
> I do not think the PMC should override the decision of the
> Tomcat group simply because you disagree with them.
No, my vote is binding... It's not a majority... I don't need the PMC to
block the thing from happening... They might need the PMC to unblock the
situation since I'm a stubborn donkey! :)
> I feel that the
> Tomcat guys have been at this awhile and if you trust them to be on the
> server, well then I guess you trust them to decide who should be on the
> server.
I trust _some_ of them on the server, as I believe not all of them trust me
(talking about code)... The only thing that _noone_ yet wrote to me on the
tomcat list saying "no, you should change your vote in a +1 or a 0 because
and because" makes me feel that (probably) I was right...
Actually on the same topic, few other people raised my same concern and
agreed (although not posting another -1 vote)... We're all civilized and
stuff :) :) :) :)
>> It is of general interest (IMO) because becoming a committer entitles you
>> not only to a little peaceful heaven in your own little project, but
>> entitles you (and, frankly, obliges you) to be a part of the Jakarta
>> Community at large. You will be given (for example) access to the
>> jakarta-commons CVS repo (if that didn't change lately), it entitles you to
>> put your name on the website and to elect the PMC.
>
> I regard that as "enfranchisement" in the federation or confederation
> that is Jakarta. If the Tomcat community trusts your judgement enough
> to make you a voting committer in that project, and Jakarta trusts the
> Tomcat community enough to make it a member project, then you hence are
> enfranchised in the federal or confederal (sp?) union that is Jakarta.
I normally trust the my co-committers on Tomcat, yes. Best coders I've seen
on this planet (of course apart notable exceptions, but that's another
story). But trusting them doesn't need to mean that I'm going to jump of a
cliff if they all do it, right?
The only information I have to vote +1 for this guy on MY project (tomcat)
are a handful of email, and 3 weeks of history... I'm sorry, but I need to
know someone before I can honestly say "he's my buddy and I want to have him
on my project"
>> And at large, it entitles you to have an @apache.org email address, to have
>> access to our live servers, entitles you to be a part of the whole Apache
>> family...
>>
> you're point being?
???? My point being that there's something behind having a name on the CVS
"avail" file and an entry in /etc/passwd... :)
>> I'm sorry, but I believe that any time a new committer is made, we _need_ to
>> put some thought in what we're "giving away", we're not just letting a guy
>> commit to our CVS server...
>
> And I don't disagree with you. Its a "states rights" argument. You're
> questioning whether this community has the right to bring someone into
> the inner circle of the community. I say its their right. Yes it
> affects us all, but it is their right as a project to do so.
Indeed... It is. I'm not arguing with that. I wouldn't do it for POI (for
example), I trust your judgment, as a committer, that you will only let
other good people in our community... As you trust me to bring only good
people in the community, right?
Now, I seriously don't know the guy we're supposed to vote in, really, and
FWIW, he should be working with me on my same codebase... You see the point?
I don't know if he's a good person for your (and mine) community...
> Its like if you have a child, he'll likely be accepted as a citizen of
> the country that you are a citizen of, yet your countrymen probably are
> not consulted in the process, though it has an affect on them. I regard
> that as freedom.
Indeed.. But I was _asked_ to vote him in... You see my point? I trust you
for who you let in thru POI...
> The POI project has been hard to give folks commit access and soft for
> others. Its been up to the judgement of the committers. Sometimes
> we've been easier on some because they fit well into the community and
> were working on an essential piece of the project, other times we've not
> been so easy (code quality concerns, importance of a feature to the
> community). We've done so with the consent of our Advisor and with
> occasional (all positive) input from other members of the greater
> Jakarta community, but with next to absolute freedom. We've executed
> this with care and always stressed the importance of the agreement and I
> think that is the trust instilled in us as a project. I'd hate to see
> that taken away from Tomcat.
>
> I've seen other project be more careless, its up to you to inform them
> of the magnitude of the situation, not argue that their rights should be
> restricted.
>
> I think you should argue your case on tomcat-dev and maybe see if others
> will follow. I don't think its appropriate to argue it here, or more
> accurately, I feel strongly that no action should be taken outside of
> the Tomcat community on this issue.
Oh no, Andy... I'm sorry, I think you misunderstood... I am not asking
anyone to override anything... I _was_ asked to vote, I voted -1 for my
reasons, because I AM a tomcat committer... Hope that clears it :)
Pier
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE] New Committer Dan Sandberg
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
>
>
>What I said was "but I believe that this group (as noted on the members
>meeting this Tuesday) is giving away committer privileges a little bit too
>easily"... I don't think that sound like "this is a resolution passed by
>members" or "this is a guideline given at that meeting"...
>
>To me it sounds like what happened: we were talking about what it does take
>for one person to become a committer and/or a member, expectations and
>bars... That's it... If I was misunderstood, well, sorry...
>
>
I understand, I still think thats something that if you are a voting
committer of the Tomcat dev group you should -1 and argue your point
there. I do not think the PMC should override the decision of the
Tomcat group simply because you disagree with them. I feel that the
Tomcat guys have been at this awhile and if you trust them to be on the
server, well then I guess you trust them to decide who should be on the
server.
>It is of general interest (IMO) because becoming a committer entitles you
>not only to a little peaceful heaven in your own little project, but
>entitles you (and, frankly, obliges you) to be a part of the Jakarta
>Community at large. You will be given (for example) access to the
>jakarta-commons CVS repo (if that didn't change lately), it entitles you to
>put your name on the website and to elect the PMC.
>
>
I regard that as "enfranchisement" in the federation or confederation
that is Jakarta. If the Tomcat community trusts your judgement enough
to make you a voting committer in that project, and Jakarta trusts the
Tomcat community enough to make it a member project, then you hence are
enfranchised in the federal or confederal (sp?) union that is Jakarta.
>And at large, it entitles you to have an @apache.org email address, to have
>access to our live servers, entitles you to be a part of the whole Apache
>family...
>
you're point being?
>
>
>I'm sorry, but I believe that any time a new committer is made, we _need_ to
>put some thought in what we're "giving away", we're not just letting a guy
>commit to our CVS server...
>
>
And I don't disagree with you. Its a "states rights" argument. You're
questioning whether this community has the right to bring someone into
the inner circle of the community. I say its their right. Yes it
affects us all, but it is their right as a project to do so.
Its like if you have a child, he'll likely be accepted as a citizen of
the country that you are a citizen of, yet your countrymen probably are
not consulted in the process, though it has an affect on them. I regard
that as freedom.
The POI project has been hard to give folks commit access and soft for
others. Its been up to the judgement of the committers. Sometimes
we've been easier on some because they fit well into the community and
were working on an essential piece of the project, other times we've not
been so easy (code quality concerns, importance of a feature to the
community). We've done so with the consent of our Advisor and with
occasional (all positive) input from other members of the greater
Jakarta community, but with next to absolute freedom. We've executed
this with care and always stressed the importance of the agreement and I
think that is the trust instilled in us as a project. I'd hate to see
that taken away from Tomcat.
I've seen other project be more careless, its up to you to inform them
of the magnitude of the situation, not argue that their rights should be
restricted.
I think you should argue your case on tomcat-dev and maybe see if others
will follow. I don't think its appropriate to argue it here, or more
accurately, I feel strongly that no action should be taken outside of
the Tomcat community on this issue.
=-Andy
>Anyway, that's what I think....
>
> Pier
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE] New Committer Dan Sandberg
Posted by "Michael A. Smith" <ma...@apache.org>.
On Fri, 24 May 2002, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> It is of general interest (IMO) because becoming a committer entitles you
> not only to a little peaceful heaven in your own little project, but
> entitles you (and, frankly, obliges you) to be a part of the Jakarta
> Community at large. You will be given (for example) access to the
> jakarta-commons CVS repo (if that didn't change lately), it entitles you to
> put your name on the website and to elect the PMC.
That should be "jakarta-commons-sandbox" not "jakarta-commons". Similar
rules apply for jakarta-commons as for all other Jakarta sub projects
(consensus approval).
regards,
michael
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [VOTE] New Committer Dan Sandberg
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
> I'm sorry, but I believe that any time a new committer is made,
> we _need_ to
> put some thought in what we're "giving away", we're not just letting a guy
> commit to our CVS server...
+1
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE] New Committer Dan Sandberg
Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.
"costinm@covalent.net" <co...@covalent.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 24 May 2002, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>
>> Personally, I feel this discussion belongs solely on the tomcat list and
>> is up to the committers of Tomcat to resolve. If the Tomcat community
>> feels the bar should be raised, let them raise it. If they do not, then
>> it shall not be raised. I don't feel it should be up to anyone else.
>
> I CC: general because the PMC was on the Cc:
>
> I think any discussion that is related with the PMC should be on general.
> ( except exceptions ).
Yes, my mistake... I have to remember that instead of pmc@ we use general@
right now...
> It seems the request to raise the bar comes from the 'members', at least
> that's what I can conclude from Pier's mail -
What I said was "but I believe that this group (as noted on the members
meeting this Tuesday) is giving away committer privileges a little bit too
easily"... I don't think that sound like "this is a resolution passed by
members" or "this is a guideline given at that meeting"...
To me it sounds like what happened: we were talking about what it does take
for one person to become a committer and/or a member, expectations and
bars... That's it... If I was misunderstood, well, sorry...
> and thus is of general interest.
It is of general interest (IMO) because becoming a committer entitles you
not only to a little peaceful heaven in your own little project, but
entitles you (and, frankly, obliges you) to be a part of the Jakarta
Community at large. You will be given (for example) access to the
jakarta-commons CVS repo (if that didn't change lately), it entitles you to
put your name on the website and to elect the PMC.
And at large, it entitles you to have an @apache.org email address, to have
access to our live servers, entitles you to be a part of the whole Apache
family...
I'm sorry, but I believe that any time a new committer is made, we _need_ to
put some thought in what we're "giving away", we're not just letting a guy
commit to our CVS server...
Anyway, that's what I think....
Pier
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE] New Committer Dan Sandberg
Posted by co...@covalent.net.
On Fri, 24 May 2002, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> Personally, I feel this discussion belongs solely on the tomcat list and
> is up to the committers of Tomcat to resolve. If the Tomcat community
> feels the bar should be raised, let them raise it. If they do not, then
> it shall not be raised. I don't feel it should be up to anyone else.
I CC: general because the PMC was on the Cc:
I think any discussion that is related with the PMC should be on general.
( except exceptions ).
It seems the request to raise the bar comes from the 'members', at least
that's what I can conclude from Pier's mail - and thus is of general
interest.
Costin
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE] New Committer Dan Sandberg
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Personally, I feel this discussion belongs solely on the tomcat list and
is up to the committers of Tomcat to resolve. If the Tomcat community
feels the bar should be raised, let them raise it. If they do not, then
it shall not be raised. I don't feel it should be up to anyone else.
-Andy
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE] New Committer Dan Sandberg
Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.
"Leo Simons" <le...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> 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.
>>
>> The ASF members didn't impose any standard. Read my mail on _why_ I CCed the
>> members list (I just explained it, the "issue" of bars and such was brought
>> up, meaning that there's interest) and I'd like to do some cross-project
>> pollination....
>
> While I think we should recognise that each project can set its own
> standards up to a degree, becoming a committer also entitles you to some
> jakarta-wide priveledges, which means there should be an (albeit
> unspoken) agreement between projects on what is the "minimum". So I
> agree this is a valuable discussion.
Exactly my point. We're not just letting a guy commit on our CVS. We're
entitling him of privileges which are going to modify the balance or the
project where he's committing (tomcat), the umbrella where his project is
hosted (jakarta) and the foundation itself....
>> Dan made some excellent contribution to the SSIServlet, great, but on my
>> archive, I can see that he posted 7 times to the list, and the first time
>> exactly 24 days ago.
>
> I do not think this has to mean he is not a member of the developers
> community per se.
No, absolutely not. If someone could tell me _something_more_ about Dan,
apart from what I can see with my own eyes (7 emails, 1 patch and a request
to be made a committer), well, I'll be happy to drop my vote... Just LET ME
KNOW HIM! :)
> For example, Avalon is tightly coupled to Cocoon. A lot of stuff in
> Avalon has been brought over from cocoon. There could be a member who
> has been working on that code for a long time, using avalon for a long
> time, and now is becoming a maintainer of that code, while only ever
> having posted 3 messages to the avalon list before. I can see how this
> person could qualify for committer status.
It's like when we "incorporate" new projects... Ceki was given the committer
status "as is", he didn't have to "prove" himself to be able/worthy of
working on the code he wrote :) (I keep talking about
> However, the following quote alone
>
> "He has already put in a great deal of work in re-factoring the
> SSIServlet in Tomcat 4.x, and seems to be willing to further contribute
> to working on this."
>
> doesn't imo provide enough of a case to grant this person (who I don't
> know anything about, btw) committer status.
Neither I know anything about him... How can I +1 him if I don't know?
> I'm guessing that there are other unspoken qualities about him /
> assurances of his commitment that made some of the tomcat committers
> feel this person in fact should be granted committer status.
I hope... Up until now (funny enough) the only "evidence" I gathered on him
is that he's also a member of the tomcat-user mailing list, but unluckily, I
haven't had time to go in the archives and read (yet).
> When all
> committers know about these other facts, everything is fine. When they
> do not (which I assume happened in this case), a -1 is in order, and the
> proposal can be ellaborated upon, after which the -1 can become a +1.
Indeed... I don't want to close any door anywhere.
> If the guy who voted -1 still feels it is a valid vote after this
> ellaboration and following discussion, well, the candidate will probably
> understand the reasoning, and if he truely does deserve committer
> status, it will be granted to him in time, no?
A -1 always have to come with a "motive"... My motive for my -1 is: I don't
know the guy. And usually (at least in the old days), a -1 means, and now
you make me change my mind... A -1 is a challenge, and god knows how many
good things came out of -1s... :)
> So I think there is no reason to be very unhappy with the current
> process we have: no project is even remotely likely to be destroyed by
> committers not worth the status, and no potential committer with a thick
> enough skin to survive at jakarta in the long run is turned away.
Nope, absolutely not... I just want to get to know who Dan is, and raise
some awareness / discuss about how/why we should accept new committers in.
Pier
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE] New Committer Dan Sandberg
Posted by Leo Simons <le...@apache.org>.
> > 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.
>
> The ASF members didn't impose any standard. Read my mail on _why_ I CCed the
> members list (I just explained it, the "issue" of bars and such was brought
> up, meaning that there's interest) and I'd like to do some cross-project
> pollination....
While I think we should recognise that each project can set its own
standards up to a degree, becoming a committer also entitles you to some
jakarta-wide priveledges, which means there should be an (albeit
unspoken) agreement between projects on what is the "minimum". So I
agree this is a valuable discussion.
> Dan made some excellent contribution to the SSIServlet, great, but on my
> archive, I can see that he posted 7 times to the list, and the first time
> exactly 24 days ago.
I do not think this has to mean he is not a member of the developers
community per se.
For example, Avalon is tightly coupled to Cocoon. A lot of stuff in
Avalon has been brought over from cocoon. There could be a member who
has been working on that code for a long time, using avalon for a long
time, and now is becoming a maintainer of that code, while only ever
having posted 3 messages to the avalon list before. I can see how this
person could qualify for committer status.
However, the following quote alone
"He has already put in a great deal of work in re-factoring the
SSIServlet in Tomcat 4.x, and seems to be willing to further contribute
to working on this."
doesn't imo provide enough of a case to grant this person (who I don't
know anything about, btw) committer status.
I'm guessing that there are other unspoken qualities about him /
assurances of his commitment that made some of the tomcat committers
feel this person in fact should be granted committer status. When all
committers know about these other facts, everything is fine. When they
do not (which I assume happened in this case), a -1 is in order, and the
proposal can be ellaborated upon, after which the -1 can become a +1.
If the guy who voted -1 still feels it is a valid vote after this
ellaboration and following discussion, well, the candidate will probably
understand the reasoning, and if he truely does deserve committer
status, it will be granted to him in time, no?
So I think there is no reason to be very unhappy with the current
process we have: no project is even remotely likely to be destroyed by
committers not worth the status, and no potential committer with a thick
enough skin to survive at jakarta in the long run is turned away.
regards,
- Leo
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE] New Committer Dan Sandberg
Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.
"costinm@covalent.net" <co...@covalent.net> wrote:
> That leaves me perplexed for several reasons...
>
> First, it's the first time I see a commiter rejected - without any
> reference to the quality and importance of his contribution, but some
> new "member's" standard we don't know about. Dan put the SSI system in a
> decent shape, that's similar with the contributions many others have
> done to become commiters.
>
> Second, if the 'members' and/or PMC has anything to say, I believe
> it should do it directly and in a public forum. Beeing talked about
> behind our back is not very comfortable.
>
> 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.
The ASF members didn't impose any standard. Read my mail on _why_ I CCed the
members list (I just explained it, the "issue" of bars and such was brought
up, meaning that there's interest) and I'd like to do some cross-project
pollination....
Dan made some excellent contribution to the SSIServlet, great, but on my
archive, I can see that he posted 7 times to the list, and the first time
exactly 24 days ago.
He sent a patch, thank you, but in my book this is far for being a member of
the developers community. I'm just uncomfortable with the bar set by this
community to accept new committers in, and since nothing gets discussed
unless someone does something "outrageous" like voting -1 on a new
committer, well, there's no better troublemaker than me to do it :)
Pier
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [VOTE] New Committer Dan Sandberg
Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.
"costinm@covalent.net" <co...@covalent.net> wrote:
> That leaves me perplexed for several reasons...
>
> First, it's the first time I see a commiter rejected - without any
> reference to the quality and importance of his contribution, but some
> new "member's" standard we don't know about. Dan put the SSI system in a
> decent shape, that's similar with the contributions many others have
> done to become commiters.
>
> Second, if the 'members' and/or PMC has anything to say, I believe
> it should do it directly and in a public forum. Beeing talked about
> behind our back is not very comfortable.
>
> 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.
The ASF members didn't impose any standard. Read my mail on _why_ I CCed the
members list (I just explained it, the "issue" of bars and such was brought
up, meaning that there's interest) and I'd like to do some cross-project
pollination....
Dan made some excellent contribution to the SSIServlet, great, but on my
archive, I can see that he posted 7 times to the list, and the first time
exactly 24 days ago.
He sent a patch, thank you, but in my book this is far for being a member of
the developers community. I'm just uncomfortable with the bar set by this
community to accept new committers in, and since nothing gets discussed
unless someone does something "outrageous" like voting -1 on a new
committer, well, there's no better troublemaker than me to do it :)
Pier
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>