On Mon, 14 Mar 2005, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> What is so special about the number 3? What's wrong with 5 committers? With
> 4? With 2? With 1?
..
> Does "sustainable" necessarily mean 3 or more committers? Is a project with
> a single committer yet consistent committer less viable than a project with
> 30 disillusioned and inactive committters?
Well - with just one commiter
-> for sure no oversight.
-> for sure an issue if he or she gets hit by a bus, a baby,
whatever.
and it is very questionable if what that group produces is an ASF
community product.
Two is more than one - but it is at only three that group dynamics first
start to kick in. And it is that group dynamic which is vital in building
and maintaining a community.
Sure 5 or 15 is even better - but if you have to draw a line - 3 is as low
as you can go.
> a single committer yet consistent committer less viable than a project with
> 30 disillusioned and inactive committters?
Both should, and will, ultimately be garbage collected.
Dw
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
