commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ceki Gülcü <>
Subject Re: [general] Apache + Meritocracy [Was: [logging] logging vs slf4j]
Date Thu, 11 Aug 2011 09:21:33 GMT
On 11/08/2011 8:13 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:

> I was going to say: "That would put Sebb in charge of the ASF!!!", but
> then I noticed that after the import of Jena Andy Seaborne appears to
> be the top count committer (I know, that doesn't measure size of
> commit).  []

The person with the most commit points is not necessarily in
charge. Sebastian Bazley's vote would carry more weight than Henri
Yandell's or Simone Tripodi's vote, but Henri and Simone voting
together would beat Sebastian's *lone* vote every time. It's basic
arithmetic and I won't insult you with an example containing figures.

> I think the problem with this is that it's an extremely arbitrary way
> of dealing with failure to find consensus. It's also not very
> meritocratic - it's based on what people have done and not what people
> are willing to do. The 'prove it in a branch' is more merit-based and
> less likely to result in status quo decisions.

Yes, committocracy, i.e. decision making based on a commit point
weighted voting system, does only take into account past
contributions. Future contributions are ignored until such a time
where the future becomes the past.

> Yup - . It's a good conversation to have had - great to hear of log4j
> 2.0 work and to have you still active in the conversation.

Yah, it has been a good discussion. Thanks for your time and input.


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

View raw message