www-community mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Erenkrantz <jerenkra...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [RFC] prototype committers list with links
Date Mon, 02 Dec 2002 21:40:28 GMT
--On Monday, December 02, 2002 16:31:56 -0500 Sam Ruby <rubys@apache.org> 
wrote:

> So, why not either (1) remove the anoncvs symbolic link, or (2) remove
> the name from the avail file.  Either action will cause these entries to
> disappear from this generated page.
>
> Clearly, side files can be created to address this, but I find processes
> such as these provide insightful perspectives into the way things are set
> up that may motivate people to DoTheRightThing(TM).

Well, the reason I wouldn't do that is that I don't want to prohibit people 
from checking them out (or, gasp!, committing a change to it).  My point is 
that those repositories aren't active in any sense of the word.  But, I 
don't think we should stop people from browsing them if they encounter it 
somehow.  But, I think it clutters the output of the pages.  (Perhaps with 
the private repos omitted, it may not be as cluttered.)

> The visual clues are not overwhelming, and at the Town Hall we heard some
> say that they were not aware that there was such a thing as ASF
> membership.  As I understand it from discussions with a number of people
> at ApacheCon, the overall goal is to get everyone who both "gets it" and
> appears likely to be sticking around for a while to become a member.
> Perhaps, this will provide a subtle push.

Perhaps, but I think raising the level of awareness by committers about the 
presence of members can be done in other ways.  To me, it just looks like 
we're creating a distinction where it might not be beneficial to have one.
Yet, it's not a big deal.  I'm just not sure I'd do it that way if I were 
doing it.  "Best damn moose turd pie."  -- justin

Mime
View raw message