Mailing-List: contact kafka-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: kafka-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of jay.kreps@gmail.com designates
 209.85.213.47 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4FCEBE79.5090408@gmail.com>
References: <4FCEBE79.5090408@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 12:01:10 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CAOeJiJiqoWDD4GmUFeQckM_Q958dnyrdiX6K35ULAnuhQLk-+g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Emeritus Committer status
From: Jay Kreps <jay.kreps@gmail.com>
To: kafka-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae934095fa04e6404c1fa9f35

--14dae934095fa04e6404c1fa9f35
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

I am fine either way. Not sure if there is a big difference between an
inactive committer and an emeritus committer that can reactivate themselves
at any time. I do agree it helps make it more clear who is doing work.

-Jay

On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Chris Burroughs
<chris.burroughs@gmail.com>wrote:

> A while ago [1] in the "committer and pmc requirements" thread emeritus
> status came up (Alan's description quoted below).  But I don't think
> there was consensus (or at least I could not find followup in the
> archives).  Is this something we agree is a good idea?
>
> > Why emeritus?  I think that it's important for people who are
> evaluating the community to have an accurate sense of about how active
> the community is in terms of committers and PMC members.  With that in
> mind I think that the emeritus status/process should be a pain free,
> non-punative, process where by emeritus members can be instantly
> reactivated at solely their own request, i.e. there is no evaluation or
> vote to reactivate them.
>
>
> [1]
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-kafka-dev/201203.mbox/%3CCAOeJiJgzNNGFdKwo4dtWqSHDuZ5Yxn=UqrwJz3kEN7bPse_Ahg@mail.gmail.com%3E
>

--14dae934095fa04e6404c1fa9f35--