On 1 August 2015 at 17:26, Peter Kelly <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 28 Jul 2015, at 9:24 pm, jan i <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi. > > > > As was obvious from other discussions (in private), we need to agree on > > what are the "rules" > > for being accepted as a committer. It is also obvious that there are room > > for diversity in how > > we apply the rules. > > > > For me life is very simple, we are a small project, and should use any > > chance to grow. This > > means, I believe we should look at: > > > > 1) Candidate has been active on dev@ and shown interest for the project > > 2) Candidate has submitted patches (not necessarily through dev@) > > 3) Candidate has otherwise done work to help corinthia. > > I think that fulfilling either of these three criteria to a sufficient > extent makes sense as criteria. I think these should be guidelines to help > people make their judgements however, not necessarily an automatic > conclusion, not least of which is that opinions about what considers > “sufficient” effort will differ. > > I think we should also add participation on JIRA issues to this list. I > would consider that we should see both communication and code from a > potential new committer in order to make a judgement. JIRA is an important > mode of communication aside from the mailing list. And of course evidence > of (non-trivial) coding work, especially when it’s done on the candidate’s > own initiative, would in my mind speak strongly in favour of a +1. > please remember not all committers are programmers. We will hopefully soon have testers/documenters/buildbot maintainers etc. so we must take care not to focus being committer around having done git commit.
rgds jan i. > > Regarding patches and attribution: Git has the ability to make a commit > where the identities of the author and committer are distinct. For example > if Linus Torvalds sends me a patch, and I decide it’s good enough to > accept, then I can use the —author option on git commit so that it’s > recorded it was Linus’s work, not mine; I just put it in the repository. > This will help in tracking who has done what, and a non-committer’s patch > doesn’t get incorrectly attributed to the committer themselves. > > — > Dr Peter M. Kelly > [email protected] > > PGP key: http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key <http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key> > (fingerprint 5435 6718 59F0 DD1F BFA0 5E46 2523 BAA1 44AE 2966) > >
