> My view, and I believe Torstens view is that to become a committer means to > join the dev lists, send in patches, be part of the community, gain trust > with the project members and then after a while be voted in as a committer. > Now if someone has a nice great big chunk of code, or even a whole > mini-subproject to donate, then they should so just that, donate the code > and if they wish to continue working on that code then send in patches to > the list or issue tracker. Eventually you'll get commit access, will have > learnt the Apache Way and all is dandy. > > The 'other' view is I believe mainly Company orientated. Company X pays > person Y to work on code that they want to be 'donated' to Project Z (which > just happens to have come from Company X in the first place.) The last thing > they want is for person Y to go through the Apache Way initiation ceremony > that could last months, they want him/her in there carrying on committing to > it as usual. Hence we have the 'here's some code, here's a new committer or > two to go with it'.
Just to clarify. The proposal is to find a middle ground between these two approaches. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
