> It seems to me that no one dares challenge the mythical 3 committer
> requirement because of the fear of retribution.
Why do you say mythical? Is it imaginary, fictitious, lacking in factual
basis or historical validity? To the contrary. You acknowledge its
validity further along in your message:
> Please note that I am not claiming that the 3 committer requirement is
> entirely without justification. Obviously, the ASF does not want to end up
> holding the bag for zombie projects. The existence of 3 active committers
> appears like a simple and measurable way of ensuring longevity.
The Logging PMC has more then 3 people to vote, but are you willing to
support the project if the one guy currently developing the code goes
walkabout? That has been the question I've consistently put to you from the
very beginning.
> My impression is that the 3 committer rule has not avoided several Apache
> projects from becoming zombies.
That is especially true within Jakarta, which illustrates the problems of an
ontological umbrella rather than a real project. Jakarta was an umbrella
for all things Java. Some things flurished on their own, some things died,
and generally the PMC hadn't a clue.
> Instead of only admitting failure-proof projects, we should perhaps
> take a chance with small yet innovative projects.
That is one purpose for the Incubator. To take those chances on small, yet
innovative, projects, but also to ensure that before they become ASF
projects, they are sustainable.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
