Isn't there a rule that the community should be diverse, i.e. not dependent on one company? How doesn't this affect the proposal's initial list of committers/ppmc members?
Martijn On 10/1/06, Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10/1/06, Mads Toftum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 01, 2006 at 11:32:44AM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > > -1. I think your response is extremely misguided. In this situation, > we > > would accept code without allowing the people who contributed it further > > access: that is completely unfair. > > > > If we do not accept the people, we don't accept the code. -- justin > > So are you suggesting we boot out a project like xxxxxxx? or are > you happy with incubator projects being fully open for companies > stacking their employees in to "own" a project? > I for one find it quite worrying that it is entirely possible to list > something like 10 or 15 of your employees on a proposal and sidestep the > whole meritocracy issue. I do too. And with the number of projects coming in with sizeable numbers of committers these days, I wonder how long it will be before the committers coming in this way will outnumber those whose committership is based on (ASF earned) merit. It seems to me that this could change the fundamental nature of the ASF. -- Martin Cooper vh > > Mads Toftum > -- > http://soulfood.dk > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
-- <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket";>Vote</a> for <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket";>Wicket</a> at the <a href="http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/";>Best Stuff in the World!</a> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
