Cliff,
I meant it to be inclusive as you say below. It might also be good to
place this on the wiki so
that it is easy to find at a later point and be explicit about those
aspects you call out. I can do that
when I get to work on the other wiki/ web aspects.
Carl.
Cliff Schmidt wrote:
On 1/10/07, Tomas Restrepo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Carl,
> There has been some discussion of the PPMC list to work out our policy
> for becoming a committer for Qpid, or what the bar is we want to
use for
> Qpid moving forward. From the discussion so far we would like new
> committers to have provided meaningful contribution to the project.
>
> The key question is what do we consider to be meaningful
contribution to
> be come a committer. Once we set that bar we need to use that for
> everyone moving forward. It is probably better to be more conservative
> in general with adding new committers.
>
> To this end we are thinking that we should see if someone consistently
> provides quality development through patches and interactions with the
> project over a period or 1 to 2 months. Based on that the PPMC will
vote
> the new committers onto the project.
As an "outsider" and newcomer to the project, the proposal sounds very
reasonable to me...
The "consistent" part and the "1 to 2 months" both seem reasonable to
me too. I'd like to suggest that there are other ways than
development to make quality contributions to the project worthy of
committership, such as documentation and release management.
Unless you meant...
"consistently provides (quality development through patches) and
(interactions with the project)"
with "interactions with the project" covering the non-dev stuff.
Cliff
