Hi tison, I also don't think that, from the community's perspective, someone with a c-bit or someone on the PMC is inherently more valuable than anyone else contributing to the project. That said, in some projects people do tend to assume that committers are more knowledgeable than non-committers, and similarly that PMC members are somehow above committers. I think that's a misconception, and I don't believe the ASF has ever tried to promote that view. Nevertheless, it seems to persist in many places.
My understanding is that a committer is not simply someone who can commit code, but someone who is committed to the project. Granting a c-bit is also about trust. A committer is someone whom the PMC trusts to act in the best interests of the project and to use the additional permissions that come with a c-bit responsibly. The same principle applies to PMC membership. To me, being a committer or PMC member is not just a recognition of technical contributions. Community behavior, collaboration, and judgment matter just as much. Even if someone has contributed a large number of commits or is an exceptional engineer, consistently being disrespectful or creating a poor community environment should not, in my opinion, make them a candidate for elevation. Regarding the word "promoted", I have definitely seen phrases like "X has been promoted to committer" or "promoted to the PMC." I'm not sure it's fundamentally incorrect. There is an increase in responsibility and authority, even if it doesn't make someone superior in day-to-day project discussions or decision-making. So, from a literal perspective, "promotion" isn't entirely wrong. However, because the word often carries organizational or hierarchical connotations, it may send the wrong message. Perhaps we could find a different term that better conveys the added responsibility and trust without implying a hierarchy. This is just my perspective, and I completely understand that others may see it differently. I'm not challenging anyone's point of view—just sharing how I think about it. -Ayush On Wed, 22 Jul 2026 at 11:49, tison <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > As the title suggests, I saw a few discussions in this form among several > (P)PMCs. > > A committer would be granted the commit bit to the project's repo to > simplify their contributions, and a PMC member could cast a binding vote in > the project decision-making process. > > But I don't think we treat a committer/PMC member as a contributor with > privileges, or at least we don't emphasize it. It can mean a higher trust > level, but all contributors are equal in contributing from the community > perspective. > > What do you think about this "promotion" language? What would you suggest > to establish a common understanding of these roles with a PMC? > > Related content: > > * https://community.apache.org/pmc/adding-committers.html > * https://community.apache.org/pmc/adding-pmc-members.html > * https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html > > Best, > tison. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
