2015-03-11 21:24 GMT+01:00 Benedikt Ritter <brit...@apache.org>: > Is the groovy project aware that (to my knowledge) the coding has to happen > on ASF infrastructure? You won't be able to use the github web UI for > merging PRs for example, because currently the ASF only mirrors git > repositories from git.apache.org to github. > > Yes, we are aware (and TBH a bit worried about it) of it, but we hope that it will be minor inconvenience. In particular GitHub has proved to be a very effective tool to bring new contributors and we fear that having the Groovy project in the middle of a ton of other projects in the "apache" organization will reduce the number of PRs we receive, but I guess this is a price to pay.
I'm very excited about this project, and will definitively be on board if > groovy enters incubation. > > Thanks! > Benedikt > > 2015-03-11 21:11 GMT+01:00 Cédric Champeau <cedric.champ...@gmail.com>: > > > A good answer to this is to take a look at who actually contributed for > the > > past 4 years: > > > > > https://github.com/groovy/groovy-core/graphs/contributors?from=2011-01-01&to=2015-03-11&type=c > > and you will see that there are not so many regular contributors. GitHub > > helped us a lot recently to have more contributions, from simple typos to > > complex bug fixes, but one should not forget that a contribution in > GitHub > > doesn't mean that the author is a committer : it's just that authors are > > preserved. > > > > While we have a lot of contributors, only a few of us have a deep > knowledge > > of Groovy internals. We will certainly encourage regular contributors to > > become committers (we already think of some), as long as those are > > following quality standards, take care of important things like > maintaining > > backwards compatibility etc... We had more than 5 committers in the past, > > but lots of them just stopped pushing code, for various reasons. In the > end > > I would be the first pleased to see more committers, but meritocracy is > > also important. And to be clear, we do not think only about code: > > contributions like documentation or tests are also very important. > > > > 2015-03-11 20:17 GMT+01:00 Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org>: > > > > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:08 PM, jan i <j...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > Hi. > > > > > > > > Having just skimmed the proposal, that in general look good, one > thing > > > > caught my eye. > > > > > > > > The proposal talks several places about a vibrant community and the > > > initial > > > > commiters are only 5. > > > > > > This, is a GREAT question! Thank you so much for raising it. While > > > preparing a proposal I've struggled with the same issue, because > looking > > > at this: https://github.com/groovy/groovy-core/graphs/contributors > makes > > > me wonder exactly the same thing. > > > > > > In the end, we decided to go ahead with the proposal the way it is and > > > position > > > the initial list of committers more as a PMC for the project. > > > > > > That still doesn't answer your (or mine! ;-)) question of what's the > best > > > way > > > to make sure than anybody who feels like they have a stake in the > project > > > and have contributed in the past get invited. > > > > > > There are a few alternatives I could see, but I would really > > > appreciate Incubator's > > > collective wisdom on what would be the best way to proceed here given > > > that Groovy is a very mature project with a lot of contributors in the > > > past. > > > Some of whom may or may not wish to keep contributing. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Roman. > > > > > > > > > -- > http://people.apache.org/~britter/ > http://www.systemoutprintln.de/ > http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter > http://github.com/britter >
