Berin Lautenback wrote:
> Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> > The people listed in the proposal as committers are the PPMC. If some
> > project allows too many people to jump on the proposal at the beginning
> > in order to make the proposal look better to Apache, then they are stuck
> > with the results.
> +1. Reading through this thread it reads like we want to have our cake
> and eat it to.
> - We want to have a full proposal that we approve and vote on, then we
> want to ignore the bits of the proposal we don't like (initial list of
> committers).
Actually, Henri Yandel proposes that the Initial Committers list be dropped
in the current form.
> - We want a podling to generate a community, but the first bit of
> community they build (the communal decision in a proposal as to who is
> allowed to commit) we decide we want to ignore. Even worse, we now
> don't even want to allow them to even suggest that list - we want to
> create an arbitrary bureaucratic beast (the PPMC) that will make that
> decision for them.
That accusation is false, misleading and insulting. The Mentors are people
who both the PMC and incoming community have generally agreed will mentor
the project. Not some "arbitrary bureaucratic beast", a comment that I
consider demeaning to the ASF as a whole, by the way, since the PMC is
fundamental to ASF process.
And what is the first order of business? Making sure that known, active,
community members join them on the PPMC. And what is the next order of
business? Working with these active members to make sure that every other
active member also becomes a committer and (probably) PPMC member.
As for "first bit of community they build (the communal decision in a
proposal as to who is allowed to commit) we decide we want to ignore", I
have to laugh. Do you have any idea how many projects have complained about
people piling into the initial committer list? It is hardly the community
they built. Consider:
- the initial committer list was originally JUST those people
coming WITH the project
- ASF Committers complained about being excluded
- ASF Committers and others started self-inclusion on the list
- Projects started complaining about a lot of people who they
don't know and who have never contributed being initial
Committers.
Sybase's complained that their proposal had a ton of people added who Sybase
didn't know because people writing the proposal (not Sybase) wanted to make
sure that their staff got added. We've seen the same with CeltiXFire, while
at the same time, IONA felt that a specific person from RedHat *would* be an
asset.
The proposed process is a mechanism to restore exactly what you say is
desirable.
> And as far as I'm concerned - if the people who wrote the proposal
> agreed to the names being on the list, then those names should
> automatically carry through as committers.
See above.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
