xml-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeremias Maerki <dev.jerem...@greenmail.ch>
Subject Re: XML Graphics: draft charter, draft resolution update, items to discuss
Date Thu, 01 Jul 2004 12:35:42 GMT
What's the result of this discussion? I don't think I really get it. I
think that contributors and committers are sufficiently defined, except
that the definition is not sufficiently acknowledged. But we've managed
to make a non-Java person a FOP committer as he deserved IMO (ok, it
took two attempts).

On 30.06.2004 21:20:58 Simon Pepping wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 28, 2004 at 11:18:10PM +0100, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> > On 28 Jun 2004, at 21:10, Cliff Schmidt wrote:
> > 
> > >Simon Pepping wrote on Monday, June 28, 2004 1:01 PM:
> > >
> > >>On Mon, Jun 28, 2004 at 01:03:38PM +1000, Peter B. West wrote:
> > >>>FOP has recently voted in new committers who may have contributed too
> > >>>little yet (in the view of some) to already become committers. This
> > >>>was primarily due the fact that a lot of old FOP comitters became
> > >>>inactive during the last two years and some of the FOP committers
> > >>>wanted to help "reignite" the project. Although Batik seems to have
> > >>>similar problems, they haven't taken similar steps. If this is a
> > >>>problem for the Batik people, especially since the common components
> > >>>will be accessible to FOP as well as Batik committers, we'd like the
> > >>>Batik people to speak up.
> > >>
> > >>I do not think that was the (only) reason to vote in certain
> > >>committers despite the fact that they had not contributed much
> > >>code. There is a gap between contributors and committers. There is no
> > >>recognized role for possible team members who contribute in other ways
> > >>than writing code, although we all know that such contributions are
> > >>important for projects with an established user base. I think there is
> > >>no such role in all of Apache; if there were, the role could be added
> > >>to the charter.
> > >
> > >I completely agree that people who aren't necessarily writing code
> > >make important contributions to a project, but why wouldn't they
> > >just be made committers at the appropriate time, in the same way the
> > >process works for people writing code.  The role of being a committer
> > >shouldn't be limited to code decisions IMO.  And people who contribute
> > >through docs, project management, release management, and other ways
> > >actually often need the same karma that code-writing folks do.
> > 
> > cliff's comments pretty well tally with my experience over in 
> > jakartaland. documentation is just as much source as the bits with 
> > brackets around and good documentation writers are harder to attract 
> > than good coders.
> FOP's repository mainly contains program code, and at the time of the
> discussion it was felt by some that committers are by nature
> coders. The remark which lead to my reaction, is the result of that
> discussion. You have a point indeed, documentation and web site stuff
> may be in the repository as well, and require committer status and
> karma.
> > there are lots of people who contribute in many ways. people who answer 
> > questions on user lists are very important (to the health of a 
> > community) as are those on the development list who contribute to 
> > discussions but these don't have (or need) an official ASF status. but 
> > google knows and remembers :)
> A status is nice to have.

Jeremias Maerki

To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org

View raw message