On 7/31/03 10:19 AM, "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote, On 31/07/2003 16.13: > >> Berin, >> >> Personally, I'm undecided about Steven Noels request to become >> a committer. In the same way that I am a relative unknown to >> you, Steven and Ted are new acquaintances. In fact, all of the >> current committers are new acquaintances to me. So my dilemma is >> do I say, "Bring 'em on, the more the merrier" or do I say, "Why >> don't we wait until the current committers have bonded before >> we add someone new." I'm straddling the fence. >> >> I did think that Ted made a good point earlier: The ratio of BEA >> to non-BEA committers is high and adding committers at this point >> could be interpreted as "padding". >> >> I'd love to hear how the other committers feel. Perhaps that will >> tip me to one side or the other. > > AFAIK usually a couple of mentors are added to the committers list. This > happened with POI AFAIK for example. > > I would keep this, as it helps by example (not on code necessarily but > at least about how to manage things), and makes it possible to have more > active oversight to the CVS codebase. No this did not happen with POI. Stefano was added as a mentor but never acted as a committer, cast no binding votes, etc. You were added because we valued your contributions on the project and wished to recognize them. I think adding folks as committers is fine, but only *active* committers (people who actually vote AND commit code into the code base) should count towards judging vitality. -Andy -- Andrew C. Oliver http://www.superlinksoftware.com/poi.jsp Custom enhancements and Commercial Implementation for Jakarta POI http://jakarta.apache.org/poi For Java and Excel, Got POI? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
