avalon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Neubauer <pe...@neubauer.se>
Subject RE: [VOTE] Stephen McConnell as a committer
Date Sun, 26 Sep 2004 09:05:36 GMT
On Sun, 2004-09-26 at 08:24 +0900, David Leangen wrote: 
> I know I don't contribute much to the project. I am merely a user that began
> using Avalon recently. I hope to become a contributor to the project, but
> for now, I'm not. So, it's probably not really my place to make any comments
> here.

Thanks David for that reply. It is exactly that position that I am
myself and that made me pull off this vote in the first place.

As for users/non-committers being part of the community, at least
1.whoever can start a vote,even a user
2.whoever can vote, even a user
3.only votes from members of the "community" (which is to be defined,
but I think in this case accepted committers) are counted. Which I think
highlights your point about who is counted part of the community.

The other question I think is relevant here is how long/much vetos are
valid and why they are for lifetime right now, which can lead to
inactive members of the community blocking progress because of old
merits.

It would be great if a project could be able to renew itself on it's
own, and not, as it seems now, be forced to rebrand, refocus, restaff,
relocate just to get on with some new thoughts on the same base concept,
as it is with Excalibur etc.. To me, it seems that this is a waste of
effort and above all distracting for users that will have to keep track
of which new project the driving people are heading off to right now
because the current project is blocking their thoughts, not on technical
grounds (which could lead to forking) but on political reasons.


/peter


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org


Mime
View raw message