On Sun, Oct 01, 2006 at 02:01:31PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > Yes, we do not accept a project if we're not prepared to grant commit access > to those who have worked on the code. Again, the perception we are on the > verge of fostering is that the meritocracy only happens here and for > communities (like Wicket) where people have earned their access elsewhere, > we are saying that we do not respect that as we will let the mentors by fiat > decide who is worthy or not.
Oh, this is something slightly different - you're talking of a project where development was done in the open and it is easy to figure out who contributed before. In that case, I think that the ppmc should pretty much automatically accept anyone who has been committers before if they _personally_ ask for it. This just isn't as clear when something comes out of a company ... it has shown itself as a bit too easy to be "creative" in those cases - and that's what I support putting a stop to. > > I don't care much about the sidestepping of meritocracy: the community will > not be able to graduate until they are diverse - hence the problem is > self-correcting. If they can't gather a diverse collection of people, then > no dice. > You're putting an awful lot of trust in that final review - it has slipped before and it will slip more often in the future. I'm sorry, but I just don't share your plans for world domination^W carefree attitude towards letting all sorts of potential nightmares into the incubator. There's always talk about one company or the other controlling the ASF - and with people getting paid to mentor, people putting their names on a project as mentors without even bothering to vote for it and with companies dumping code and a very large number of "committers" on us, who's to blame people for speculating like that? > I am concerned that we may permit PPMCs who view it as their right to refuse > access to people who have actively contributed in the past and want to > continue contributing because they don't like them personally or their > employer or feel that they are not leadership material. Those aren't > grounds for barring access. -- justin No more or no less than it would be in a non-incubating project. If you see any hints of that, that should be fixed by hitting the mentor with a very large cluestick, not by leaving the doors open for everyone else to abuse as they see fit. just my $.02 </flame> vh Mads Toftum -- http://soulfood.dk --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
