commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robert Burrell Donkin <>
Subject Re: Unnecessary etiquette rule
Date Thu, 19 May 2011 10:00:37 GMT
On 05/19/11 06:34, Phil Steitz wrote:
> On 5/18/11 9:36 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>> The following rule seems unnecessary to me:
>> "each committer who commits to a component must add their name to the
>> STATUS file" (or pom.xml)
>> I've never done this, have touched every component (give or take a
>> component or two) and have never had negative feedback*. Either
>> everyone's being very polite or it's not actually a necessary piece of
>> etiquette :)
> Well, now that you mention it, your wanton pillaging has left a
> trail of devastation and fear in the hearts of Commoners across the
> realm  - he he.


> Seriously, I think that as stated, the rule is obsolete; but the
> spirit of it is good.  When that was originally written, components
> were all independently built using Ant, sites were, lets just say
> "diverse," mostly built using Anakia, and most of what people worked
> on was actual code internal to the components.  So when you started
> committing to a component, that meant you were going to really get
> into its code and join the little subcommunity that was working on
> it.  You signaled that by adding yourself to the STATUS file.
> Partly because we have added complexity and inter-dependency to the
> build and site generation processes, partly because people have
> shown willingness and interest in doing these things, we now have a
> decent incidence of people "touching" components without really
> jumping in to the code that deeply.  I think that is a *good thing*
> as it helps keep the code and sites in better shape.


> I still think it is a good idea for us to keep something like a
> STATUS file up to date indicating who the active committers are for
> each component.  I am not sure, honestly, if the pom.xml team list
> is the right place for this, though; as it is more
> externally-facing, gets published as part of releases, etc.  The
> current poms are also full of references to people who have not
> contributed in quite a while.  The value of having a team list that
> committers add themselves to and drop off of is that adding oneself
> is a statement of real interest in the component and willingness to
> help move it forward.  There are some old Wiki pages somewhere where
> we started to track this kind of thing; but IMO the component's svn
> is a better place.
> So bottom line is I think the rule should stand with s/commits to a
> component/makes a nontrivial change to a component/ and  s/STATUS
> file (or pom.xml)/not sure, maybe stay with pom/
> I also think we agree to take ourselves off of the lists when we are
> no longer contributing or seriously thinking about it - similar to
> the unwritten rule about taking yourself off a PMC.

sounds reasonable to me :-)


(who made a foolish promise at Apache Retreat to take a look at Nick's
validator patch and see whether it makes sense)

(my computer time is still limited so please limit those expectations)

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

View raw message