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 bimargulies@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.215.173 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAKQbXgBSuK-A1YzvX3cGZLa-6011wDnVcUnKsf=zounpxngayw@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAGU5spcgcX0Mnow6aVRrU9gB9rmozSTF2dxiioiP=ersoQQxHw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEWfVJkCKCnmfAPE=hb1=VoCvLfFxOX=wo1H2gmciYgDpx5UCg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKQbXgBSuK-A1YzvX3cGZLa-6011wDnVcUnKsf=zounpxngayw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 16:55:55 -0400
Message-ID: 
 <CALhtWkf7svhjZ1Kfg9RLu4oZQ1CBXcGz9=nSCMOV4m_ebRxPUQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: GSoC & Temporary commit access accounts
From: Benson Margulies <bimargulies@gmail.com>
To: dev@community.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

>
> Personally I feel that GSoC students should earn commit access just
> like anyone else.

I have a lot of sympathy for Greg's position. Treating 'committer' as
a single monolithic category drives people away.

A typical problem case is someone who sets out to undertake a big,
complex, contribution. Without at least svn commit access to a branch,
the overhead can get so onerous to drive people away. yes, the mentor
can be a human mirror and push stuff into a branch. That's a lot of
extra work. I've seen it happen. Yes, various tricks with git
mitigate. On the other hand, having the code in svn in a branch allows
the PMC to supervise the contribution much more easily. When I first
turned up at Apache, I deferred work on the main project I had in mind
for months and pecked away at small bugs to earn committer status. Not
everyone has that much patience, and not everyone, in my opinion,
should have to. I'd be happy to see the foundation endorse the idea
that a PMC can choose to grant commit karma to branches, in a trial
basis, to people who have submitted a suitable cla. That would not
given them nexus karma, web-site-editing karma, or dogma karma.