On Apr 24, 2009, at 3:25 PM, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Andrus Adamchik <and...@objectstyle.org
> wrote:
If you have proof otherwise, please share.
How about that in those four years, no new committers were admitted to
the project? A project with a scope and as successful as Click could
easily have attracted 4-8 great committers over the course of 4 years.
To ask a counter question: why haven't these contributors been
considered as committers until just *now*? Isn't that a sign of
community immaturity?
Martijn
I disagree. First of all there was another committer, who dropped off
for health reasons. So the original author had no problem accepting at
least 3 more people on board. Saying how many committers they should
have after X years sounds like a business plan. It doesn't work this
way in open source.
Then there are different types of contributions. Some warrant a
committership, others show that a given person should not be given SVN
write access under no circumstances. Then there is a pace issue (which
I think is at play here, and this is being reevaluated now), where you
need to see a person become a community member before allowing SVN
access. This has nothing to do with maturity, just common sense.
Andrus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
