Ted, I am guilty as charged of going "heads down" for a while. However, I am back for at least the next year. Though I won't be able to participate in user and dev discussions due to time. I'm on the lists, but not reading everything unless it stands out. If you want my input, please holla at me.
On Jan 16, 2008 11:10 AM, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jan 16, 2008 12:23 AM, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That's a fair question, but I have an answer for it. Put simply, I feel > > that anyone officially made a member of a project team has accepted a > > greater level of responsibility than someone in the larger user community. > > A careful reading of "How it Works" implies that the Apache Way is > designed so that individual committers do not have to accept a greater > level of responsibility. The notion is that we can invite enough > committers to the table that there will always be other volunteers > available. > > @Struts, we seem to have trouble keeping enough active committers in > play to make up for the committers who are heads-down on our day jobs. > We also have trouble electing "grassroot contributors" who are not > star coders. The trouble with electing only star coders is that people > tend to focus on their own contributions, rather than applying patches > submitted by others. I can testify that some of the very best features > in Struts 1 were contributions made by people who where not > committers. > > As PMC member, I would really like to know who intends to be available > to support a release, or at least who expects to be heads-down for > awhile. It's not uncommon for a release to pass with a minimum number > of binding votes. If some of the voters are about to go heads-down on > another project for six months, I'd like to know that before casting > my own GA vote. As a group, we really suck at letting each other know > that we won't be around for a while. > > > On Jan 16, 2008 1:45 AM, Al Sutton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We could always switch to holding off releases until we have 0 bugs of major > > and above level :) (if we did that then we should do the M$ thing and switch > > the default JIRA level to be the lowest possible and let the user upgrade it > > rather than everything going in as Major by default). > > In practice, we do. There have been many times we counted down to > rolling a build based on how many outstanding issues we had left. > > To an extent, that's what's happening with Struts 2.1.1. When we get > to zero patches, I would be happy to roll another build. (Though, if > another committer got antzy, someone else could post another release > plan and roll one sooner.) > > > -Ted. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- James Mitchell --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
