Mailing-List: contact dev-help@community.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@community.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of uli@spielviel.de designates
 83.223.83.232 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <550B0237.8030403@spielviel.de>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 18:07:03 +0100
From: =?UTF-8?B?VWxyaWNoIFN0w6Ryaw==?= <uli@spielviel.de>
Reply-To: dev@community.apache.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10;
 rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "dev@community.apache.org" <dev@community.apache.org>
Subject: Re: commit rights to ComDev non-community.a.o site resources
References: <17612679.0LQvIchjWZ@herve-desktop>
 <5505F892.5080401@spielviel.de>
 <CADPkm87p0LOhT9nvsLcPh7PBsfOPNW4tpT1_ZxLozrGGfdtWbA@mail.gmail.com>
 <965CE22B-BAE7-4EC8-BFEC-991071C734FB@spielviel.de>
In-Reply-To: <965CE22B-BAE7-4EC8-BFEC-991071C734FB@spielviel.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

So shall we put this to a vote or may I assume lazy consensus?

If so I'd go ahead and modify the permissions accordingly.

Cheers,

Uli

On 2015-03-16 09:21, Ulrich Stärk wrote:
> One doesn't exclude the other. I'd first like us to establish whether committership to the ComDev code is by invitation only or open to all existing Apache committers (which I'd prefer).
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Uli
> 
>> Am 15.03.2015 um 23:22 schrieb Pierre Smits <pierre.smits@gmail.com>:
>>
>> Why not register the solution as a component of the COMDEV project in JIRA,
>> and do the same as any other ASF project does when it comes to code:
>> register and evaluate issues, have patches registered there and have
>> invited committers work from there.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Pierre Smits
>>
>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>> Services and Retail & Trade
>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>
>>> On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 10:24 PM, Ulrich Stärk <uli@spielviel.de> wrote:
>>>
>>> Heh.
>>>
>>> When I put that sentence in the board report we didn't have projects-new
>>> yet.
>>>
>>> I don't see a reason why we shouldn't open up those two (or even all of
>>> /comdev) for all committers
>>> as long as changes are first discussed on our lists.
>>>
>>> What do others think?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Uli
>>>
>>>> On 2015-03-14 16:38, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I lately gave patches for projects-new that were not applied: it seems
>>> there
>>>> is a problem to determine who should do it (to avoid projects-new to be a
>>>> single-man affair).
>>>>
>>>> Then I made some investigations: in the last board report for ComDev
>>> [1], I
>>>> think I found the cause:
>>>> "Since artifacts produced by ComDev are usually documentation on our
>>> website
>>>> which is writable for all Apache committers, we usually do not add
>>> committers
>>>> to the ComDev project."
>>>>
>>>> Then should projects(-new).apache.org become writeable for all Apache
>>>> committers too? Same for reporter.apache.org?
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Hervé
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://whimsy.apache.org/board/minutes/Community_Development.html
>>>