Erik, Thanks. I appreciate the support. Of course I expect that we should be put to a vote. It is my understanding that all decision-making, etc, should happen on public lists. Thus, I didn't feel that I should make my appeal to George privately.
Doug On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 12:45 PM, Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Doug - that's a bit of an unconventional way to get commit privileges to an > Apache project. George really should propose you, and Digy (though > separately) as committers, and then there is a vote. > > For the record, I'm +1 on you both joining this project as committers > though. > > George - at your discretion, please make an official VOTE proposal for > each. I guess it's just George and I with binding votes here, but let's do > it the usual way for posterity :) > > Erik > > > On Aug 4, 2008, at 1:33 PM, Doug Sale wrote: > > George, >> >> I am writing to request that Digy and I are made committers as soon as >> possible. It is a practical matter. Maintaining a separate codebase >> locally and adding and removing patches is time-consuming and error-prone >> when dealing with many deltas. Especially, for myself, considering that I >> have begun to port the changes from the 2.3.2 release as well - it's a >> juggling act. I bet that we each have a different version of the code on >> our local machines. SVN access will simplify this process, and we will >> all >> be assured of working on the latest code at any given time. Your role as >> gatekeeper will still apply, and any unwarranted commits may simply be >> rolled back. >> >> Thanks, >> Doug >> > >
