Mailing-List: contact dev-help@activemq.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@activemq.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of david_jencks@yahoo.com
 designates 98.138.91.72 as permitted sender)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Have every committer on the PMC by default
From: David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com.INVALID>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CALznzY65CmkxUFR2aD=n2XsASFCvfVAEhFamw4BzYxkKt8Q6-A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 10:05:24 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <8EC43C5C-EE1E-4BF1-930B-5228373C1F05@yahoo.com>
References: 
 <CAH+vQmOwiNJCpqRWQLhtaFEJs6QF9EENMTVQaz6d+56r8KSo=Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALznzY65CmkxUFR2aD=n2XsASFCvfVAEhFamw4BzYxkKt8Q6-A@mail.gmail.com>
To: dev@activemq.apache.org

James,

Don't name names, but are there any actual existing real-life amq =
committers who you think shouldn't be pmc members?  My experience has =
been that many projects start out with this worry but eventually decide =
it is pointless and a waste of time=85. sort of "if they can mess with  =
the code, lets try to get them to do the extra work of being a pmc =
member" :-)

Given my rather minimal involvement in amq recently I'm not likely to =
formally vote but I'd be +1.

david jencks

On Jan 29, 2015, at 9:32 AM, James Carman <james@carmanconsulting.com> =
wrote:

> -1.  Showing you have the technical chops to code (merit) !=3D the
> ability to be a good steward and act on behalf of the foundation in
> order to manage the project effectively.
>=20
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 8:42 AM, Gary Tully <gary.tully@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>> In that way, committers that are interested in project management
>> duties can indicate same with their votes. Effectively self elect to
>> step up to the task.
>>=20
>> What is the down side?