On Sunday 13 March 2005 00:20, Ceki Gülcü wrote: > It seems to me that no one dares challenge the mythical 3 committer > requirement because of the fear of retribution.
This is not the only dogma in ASF... On Sunday 13 March 2005 04:13, Noel J. Bergman wrote: > Roy T. Fielding wrote: > > If logging later loses interest in the project, [then] we are > > no worse off than if that code had died within incubator. > Perhaps, but by making sure that the project does have a community before it > leaves the Incubator, as we have been tasked to do, we increase its odds for > success. Noel, I must say that reading your comment, sounds that you are "power hungry" and wants to remain in control. I can assume this is not the case, but perhaps you should avoid such perception. > > it is far more likely to gain community once it leaves incubator > The historical facts do not support that perspective. 1. So what are the historical facts? Please present some. Which graduated project did not gain a wider community after graduation? 2. If a existing committer opened up a Log4Y in LS, hacked around in it for months, made binary packages available, it could come into existence without any 'incubation' and not be subject to any 'community requirement'. Log4Net has a strong community. It is known as the Logging Services project. Period. Whether the developer was a committer prior to starting to work on it or not, is totally irrelevant. Not looking at forming a TLP here. Cheers Niclas --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
