Hey dims:
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
- - People who work should take the blame :) (PMC members have legal
yes/no for releases)
- - People who i think will stick around (subjective)
- - People who i think have been around for a while (objective - check
email archives/JIRA/svn commits)
- - More than 1 WS project (would be good but not necessary or sufficient)
- - Engage of mailing lists properly for discussions (subjective - how
many emails? how much do you drive to closure?)
- - Technical expertise (may be, but not necessary or sufficient)
+1 to all of this, dims.
As has been discussed before in other projects [1], some folks believe
that essentially all committers should be PMC members. From my POV, if
you trust someone enough to give them commit rights to your code, it
seems a pretty small (and reasonable) step to also enfranchise them with
the right to VOTE. Note that while it's true we respect committer votes
a great deal in the WS PMC, non-PMC committers, technically, cannot
actually use a -1 to veto code changes! [2]
So I very much agree with dims' list here when considering, but I also
tend towards defaulting to +1 unless I perceive a problem with one of
the elements on this list.
Thanks,
--Glen
[1] http://markmail.org/message/ydlyhbe6xigtw4nb
[2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
