On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 7:28 PM, Sandy Ryza <sandy.r...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> It looks like the difference between the proposed Spark model and the > CloudStack / SVN model is: > * In the former, maintainers / partial committers are a way of > centralizing oversight over particular components among committers > * In the latter, maintainers / partial committers are a way of giving > non-committers some power to make changes > I can't speak for CloudStack, but for Subversion: yes, you're exactly right, Sandy. We use the "partial committer" role as a way to bring in new committers. "Great idea, go work >there<, and have fun". Any PMC member can give a single +1, and that new (partial) committer gets and account/access, and is off and running. We don't even ask for a PMC vote (though, we almost always have a brief discussion). The "svnrdump" tool was written by a *Git* Google Summer of Code student. He wanted a quick way to get a Subversion dumpfile from a remote repository, in order to drop that into Git. We gave him commit access directly into trunk/svnrdump, and he wrote the tool. Technically, he could commit anywhere in our tree, but we just asked him not to, without a +1 from a PMC member. Partial committers are a way to *include* people into the [coding] community. And hopefully, over time, they grow into something more. "Maintainers" are a way (IMO) to *exclude* people from certain commit activity. (or more precisely: limit/restrict, rather than exclude) You can see why it concerns me :-) Cheers, -g
