Yes, most of the commits were on Fauxton, but almost without fail, handing out a commit bit results in an upsurge of activity. Sometimes a huge upsurge. And I think that we need to keep enabling people to more easily contribute to the project.
As for there being no candidates, I disagree. There are several people in this community who do not have a commit bit, who I personally have shortlisted for election. Sometimes, I'm just waiting to see a little uptick in patches, mailing list posts, or what have you. Also, activity begets activity. The work you are doing on the releases is hugely influential in communicating to the outside world that CouchDB is alive and kicking, and that in turn draws in more users, and more contributors. On 22 January 2014 13:16, Dirkjan Ochtman <dirk...@ochtman.nl> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Noah Slater <nsla...@apache.org> wrote: >> My first comment is: if we want more reviews, let's have more committers. >> >> We double our committer base in 2013, and the results look like this: >> >> https://www.ohloh.net/p/couchdb/analyses/latest/languages_summary > > I don't think this is a panacea. > > Yes, adding more committers is good. But it seems to me that *most* of > the effort in 2013 has gone into Fauxton, which AFAICT is almost > exclusively the work of people who are paid to work on it by a single > vendor. This is great, but I think we're currently sorely lacking in > more coreish committer man-hours, and I don't think we have good > candidates to add as committers here (although I do hope the bigcouch > + rcouch merge will result in a resurgence of core work). > > Cheers, > > Dirkjan -- Noah Slater https://twitter.com/nslater
