ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <>
Subject Re: moving to a top-level project (was: [Ant nudge STATUS] Better than we thought...)
Date Sat, 26 Oct 2002 23:38:46 GMT
On Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 06:11:55PM -0400, Sam Ruby wrote:
> Greg Stein wrote:
> > 
> > The Board passes a resolution establishing the PMC. That resolution defines
> > who the members of the PMC are, and who the Chair is. Since the Board has
> > very little visibility into the Ant community (i.e. who the stakeholders
> > are), we'd look to them to provide the Board with the slate of people for
> > the PMC.
> <indignation type="mock">
> Ahem.  Some of us have more visibility than others, perhaps.  :-P
> </indignation>

hehe... yes. I meant the Board as a whole. You're 1 of 9, and our regular
reports on Ant are filtered by whatever color glasses you might be wearing
at the time :-). To get the same visibility into the Ant project that the
Board gets for its other projects would be a *huge* burden on you (as the
Jakarta Chair) to come up with that report. Sheesh... it would be pages and
pages to cover all of Jakarta (!!). I certainly would not want to require
that from anybody (while the Directors and various officers have legal
responsibilities, when you get down to it, we really want to retain that
notion of volunteerism).

> > My personal recommendation is for a larger PMC (e.g. not limited to N
> > people). In particular, the people who have been committers for a "long
> > while" (basically, the long-time stakeholders in Ant). Over time, the PMC
> > can vote to add new PMC members to itself.
> Personally, I'd amend that (given my visibility into Ant community and 
> all that) to be both long time *AND* currently active.

Oh! Yes, absolutely. When you're initially setting up a PMC, that makes the
best sense. When we set up the APR PMC, we started with the active httpd and
Subversion developers (these were the real stakeholders in seeing a
successful APR), and put them on the PMC. But we also made it such that an
httpd PMCer/developer could simply ask, and we'd add them. IOW, this "easy
on" attitude was kind of a safety valve for "oops. we forgot to add you" :-)

> Few have been
> committers to Ant longer than I have, but this year I have done a few 
> commits at most.  While I believe that I still have earned enough trust 
> and respect to commit my own patches and vote on topics that I plan to 
> actively participate in solving, I would not feel the slightest bit 
> slighted if I were not included in the proposed PMC list.  (Rest assured 
> that I will poke my head in from time to time anyway).


But I would also counter that you have a long-term view on Ant which could
be valuable to the PMC. The PMC is in charge of adding committers and
members to itself. To that end, your vote on who would make a good committer
or not is valuable. (in the sense that the PMC is looking out for the ASF's
interests, and providing commit access to the ASF's code implies a sense of
trust that the committer will do right by the ASF).


Greg Stein,

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message