Roland I understand your concerns. But the text doesn't mirror my experience.
Firstly, not all TLPs require active committers to be on the PMC. For example the WS PMC has plenty of committers not on the PMC. Secondly, being on the PMC is not a huge burden, except maybe the chair who has to write the reports. Otherwise, participating in discussions is something we all do (like this one). I'm on two PMCs and it isn't a burden to me. I respect your issues and I think its acceptable to have committers who are not on the PMC. The main reason to encourage committers to be on the PMC is that you only get Apache legal protection if you are on the PMC. So for legal reasons its better that committers are PMC members. Paul On 5/23/07, Roland Weber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Oleg, see the definition of the roles in Apache: http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#roles Committer: ...are actually making short-term decisions for the project. PMC: The PMC as a whole is the entity that controls the project... My coding frenzy earlier this year and the subsequent build process dispute have given me both reason and opportunity to reconsider my involvement in this project. We got along much better recently for one simple reason: I am restricting myself to short-term decisions. I think it all took a wrong turn when I became a PMC and started to care about "Jakarta as a whole". But even with Jakarta out of the picture, there remains one simple fact: The two of us are in constant disagreement. On the coding level, I feel that we get along great. We exchange our ideas, pick them up, reconsider, make small steps, and so on. In the end, we have something that is better than either of us would have achieved on his own. (or so I think :-) On the project level, this does not work. We keep modules in a component, or we don't. We have a build process that covers all of the code, or we don't. There is no compromise. The Apache Way is clear: Meritocracy. If you want to see things go your way, put in more work. But my time is limited, and I am still spending more of it than I want to. So I decided to care much less about things beyond the coding level. And I believe this is, in the long run, not compatible with being on a PMC. I'm staying on the Jakarta PMC to see HttpComponents out, but that's it. This would not be a problem for me if there were more people involved and we could get majority decisions. But that is not the case. Time and again, it is you and me and nobody else. I am sick and tired of these stalemate discussions that eat up my time and raise my frustration level without leading anywhere. If I see more people actively involved, I might reconsider this decision. But as things are now, I will not put myself into more heads-up situations with you. > Active committer MUST be a PMC member. I remember that Henri voice his _opinion_ that all committers _should_ be PMC. That may even have been the opinion of the board. But I don't remember seeing that written down as a binding rule for either Apache or Jakarta. PMCs set their own rules of course, and so can the HttpComponents PMC if we go TLP. If being a committer requires being PMC, I will provide patches for JIRA issues and let somebody else do the commits. I am not looking for ways to spend more time on this project, or to take more responsibility for it. Quite the opposite is true. cheers, Roland --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Paul Fremantle Co-Founder and VP of Technical Sales, WSO2 OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair blog: http://pzf.fremantle.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
