On 02/03/2011 22:44, Glenn Adams wrote:
Hi Glenn,
<snip/>
Now, regarding commitership, I must say that if I were already a
committer, I would probably have already fixed all the current FB
exclusions or documented the chaff as acceptable. However, having to
go through other committers to fix up all these issues is simply too
much pain, partly because it places more delays into the process and
makes it harder to implement such fixes in the face of a moving
target. Having spent at least 8 months contributing to FOP, I find it
disconcerting that (1) I am still waiting feedback about committer
status, (2) I have not even been acknowledged as a contributor (see
http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/team.html). Frankly, the process
appears to be broken.
You do indeed have a point. I don't think I would go as far as saying
the process is broken, just a bit slow. I do agree that you at least
deserve to be classed as an official Contributor. Please send me a short
bio and I will add you to the team page.
As for committership criteria, most of the committers have a similar
view on requirements. 5-6 useful patches, plus helping out on the user
mailing list. It's true 1 or 2 folks made it without any patches, but
then it did take them a couple of years to reach comitter status and
they were very active on the user list, almost single handedly solving
all issues and helping out with other tasks, such as website content
and/or bug scrubbing.
A time alone does not indicate the value of someones contributions,
which is different for everyone. It is true that you have donated a very
substantial piece of work, but 1 patch alone does not mean you
automatically qualify to be a committer. We want to see a steady flow of
patches over time, plus helping users on the mailing list.
G.
Thanks,
Chris
