commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [general] Apache + Meritocracy [Was: [logging] logging vs slf4j]
Date Thu, 11 Aug 2011 12:00:08 GMT
On 11 August 2011 10:21, Ceki Gülcü <ceki@qos.ch> wrote:
> 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).  [http://svnsearch.org/svnsearch/repos/ASF/search]
>
> The person with the most commit points is not necessarily in
> charge. Sebastian Bazley's vote would carry more weight than Henri

Why should my vote carry more weight?

I may have created more SVN revisions than others, but I don't think
that gives my vote any more value.

Apart from the fact that commit count has little bearing on actual
work done, and is not an indicator of quality, there are other ways of
contributing (e.g. mailing list feedback, commit review, release
testing, bug reporting) that I consider equally valuable.

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

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


Mime
View raw message