Hi Matt, > I'm looking for general feedback about the group's > perception of incubated projects and the number of > roles that may be assumed by a foundation member in > one. Can I view RAT as an example that it would be > considered kosher for a member to be both champion of > and an initial committer on a given proposal? And in > contrast, that it _would_ be considered a conflict of > interest/logistical impossibility for a committer to > be a mentor?
I don't see why a champion or mentor shouldn't be allowed to be a committer. And if they are already working on the project by the time it enters incubation, why should they not be on the initial list of committers? [1] mentions that mentors must earn committership even though they are given karma for administration purposes. It also mentions that mentors can be on the initial list of committers, but are not required to. Maybe it would feel a bit queer if a mentor voted him- or herself in as a committer, but even then it would take other binding votes. cheers, Roland [1] http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Roles_and_Responsibilities.html#Committers --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
