On Nov 23, 2007, at 3:10 AM, ant elder wrote:
Ask people to self nominate - I imagine often inactive commiters
won't
put themselves forward, removing any issue. Then maybe a review of
the
list by the the mentors and proposed PMC Chair. If there are issues
it
can be discussed in the community and if theres disagreement then
vote. I imagine most of the time it won't come to voting.
Niall
That sounds reasonable but is it ok to do that? Its quite hard to
remove a
committer from a real Apache project, are incubating committers
different
and its ok to just ask who wants to be included at graduation?
Just a data point, in Yoko here is consensus on the community that
there is not enough interest to support Yoko as a TLP and that it is
better placed as a sub-project as the code is used by other Apache
projects. During the discussion it was asked who was interested in
continuing on with the code base. Only a subset of the current
committer base that is "on record" in SVN indicated that they were
interested in continuing so there is at least one project that fits
this model.
I also think, as others have suggested, that this is not an exact
science which is why we have mentors to provide the subjective input.
I think we all trust the mentor's input on how a project is conducting
itself. The Tuscany example of late is a good example where Paul
Fremantle indicated he thought the project was doing well and was
ready for graduation. Rather than simply relying on a set of external
statistics (which can be useful at times) I very much trust those that
have stepped up to mentor a project and give their opinion sufficient
weight to help formulate a recommendation.
My $.02
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
