Mailing-List: contact geronimo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Message-ID: <20030910180041.67751.qmail@web12802.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 11:00:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: Davanum Srinivas <dims@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: dims@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [vote] Process for adding committers
To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org, Ryan Ackley <sackley@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <004e01c377c5$51656cd0$0d8fcda3@tdryan>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Ryan,

Problem is that not much has happened so far...Note that the regular process can be invoked at any
time by any committer. I was indeed forcing the issue to show non-committers who are interested
that something is happening on that front. No, i never mentioned anything about picking X or Y #
of committers. Each person would get a vote +1/-1/+0/-0 as per regular voting rules. 

As i said before any way you guys pick is ok as long as something is happening :)

-- dims

--- Ryan Ackley <sackley@cfl.rr.com> wrote:
> > Surely the basic ideas are the same, though?
> 
> I was trying to point out that there doesn't have to be a set week for
> nominations. It is possible to have 100 new committers in the next 10
> minutes if a current committer steps up and nominates people and they have
> the votes.
> 
> If you are a committer and you feel someone *deserves* to be a committer
> just propose them as committer right now! Why wait for some week thats set
> aside.
> 
> The only purpose I see to something like that is to motivate the current
> committers to actually nominate someone. If this is the case this is
> defeating the purpose of the system. It should be a spontaneous vote based
> on the merits of the proposed committer. Not "We need 4 new committers, who
> do we pick?"
> 
> Ryan
> 


=====
Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/