I agree with you on this Joe. A lot of times my metric is more responsiveness and participation than in legal/language intricacies. More power to folks who are good at that, it's just not me.
Cheers, Chris On 1/12/13 9:07 AM, "Joe Schaefer" <joe_schae...@yahoo.com> wrote: >One of my long time pet peeves with how we >PMC members participate in vetting releases >is our penchant for focusing too much on the >policies surrounding license and notice info. >I really think our exclusive focus on things >that really don't pose any organizational risk >to either the org nor the project participants >serves us well in our other, often unexpressed >but far more relevant, goals about encouraging >committers to participate in active review of >their project's commit activity. > >Just think about this for a second, what's more >likely for people to start suing us over, some >bug in the NOTICE file or an undetected backdoor >in one of our programs? I am personally far more >concerned about the current state of the actual >review going on in our podlings than I am about >NOTICE minutia. > >Maybe we should compile some list of which committers >are actually subscribed to their project's commit lists? >It's crude but it may be useful data to look at to >a first order. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
