On Tue, 2009-08-04 at 10:48 +0100, ant elder wrote: > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 10:21 AM, Ross Gardler<rgard...@apache.org> wrote: > > > I would suggest that anyone wishing to vote -1 on the graduation of a > > podling on grounds of diversity of code commits needs to back it up > > with documented evidence that either a) the committers are not > > listening to the community or b) there is no active oversight from > > those with voting rights. > > > > The Incubator policy minimum graduation requirements says: > > "The project is not highly dependent on any single contributor (there > are at least 3 legally independent committers and there is no single > company or entity that is vital to the success of the project)" > - http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Graduating +from+the+Incubator > > There is a judgement call to be made about if a committer needs to be > active and what being active means (posting to the ML vs. committing > code etc).
The archives are full of discussions what active is and what not. Bottom line: activity is hardly measurable since you can be active in the community or in code or both. Being active on the ml is even more important then committing code, or do we not always saying community over code? > > Committing code is important, having just two actively committing > committers isn't quite enough IMHO, especially when they're both with > the same employer. Not sure here but Greg pointed out that the project is NOT (!!!) part of their day job. Meaning they are independent since the company has nothing to do with Pivot. How many committers are in the project? As understand from the thread 2 coding committers but how many other committers? > In the past lots of poddlings first graduation vote > doesn't pass due to diversity issues, they go away and encourage > others to be active committers and graduate on the next attempt and > the project is better for it, and thats what I think should happen > here with Pivot. If they have 3 committers than I do not see the diversity part as problem. Diversity is for projects which have a company behind it that have a big interest in the project and its direction. Since we used DAY as example in the thread a lot: Day has an interest in Sling and its directions, if only Day employee are committers and they work mainly on their working hours on the project then Sling would have a diversity problem, since as soon as Day loose interest the project can die. Since there is no company behind Pivot I do not see at all the diversity as problem. Only if there are only two committers that I see as problem since voting does not work out. salu2 -- Thorsten Scherler <thorsten.at.apache.org> Open Source Java <consulting, training and solutions> Sociedad Andaluza para el Desarrollo de la Sociedad de la Información, S.A.U. (SADESI) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
