----- Original Message ----
> From: Craig L Russell <craig.russ...@oracle.com>
> To: Incubator <general@incubator.apache.org>; Apache Board <bo...@apache.org>
> Sent: Tue, August 17, 2010 12:42:18 PM
> Subject: Re: an experiment
>
>
> On Aug 16, 2010, at 6:37 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>
> > I certainly could have handled it better. But that thread is
> > *indicative* of the problem. We've pointed out a several now: two with
> > Subversion, one with OODT.
> >
> Since you've brought it up time and again, it's worth thrashing through. The
>kerfuffle about project roles was brought up by a member of the "peanut
>gallery" [sic] and I thought quite reasonably.
>
> Words matter. Definitions of terms matter. Communication is broken if I say
> a
>word that has one meaning for you and a different meaning for me. We end up
>talking about two different things and we think we're having a discussion but
>we're not.
>
> One of the first things you learn in Apache is that there are (at least)
> three
>levels of involvement that community members can take: contributor,
>committer,
>PMC member. See "how it works, roles, etc. etc." on the Apache site.
>
> Now the subversion project comes in where these are not the commonly used
>terms. Instead, the terms for committer and PMC member are partial committer
>and full committer. That's fine for the established community, but the
>translation from committer -> partial committer and PMC member -> full
>committer needs to be done within the project, not within Apache.
>
> When I saw this month's board report for Subversion, I was taken aback that
>the board is expected to follow the terminology used by only one project.
>Really? The board, which has used the same terms for 10++ years, is now going
>to hear reports of full committers and partial committers? What do we do when
>another project comes in and uses yet different terms for the same concept?
>Do
>we now make a translation manual for everyone in Apache to use?
>
> My $.02: if you want to talk about full and partial committers in the Apache
>community, there's more work to do so everyone gets on board with your
>terminology. Otherwise, communications will be enhanced if you keep full and
>partial committers to yourselves and translate to the commonly used Apache
>terms when dealing with the Apache community.
>
> And yes, I'd like to see the Subversion board report amended to remove
>references to full and partial.
FWIW, Craig's position here resonates with me more than
Justin's or Greg's. The "peanut-gallery-effect" is just
the well-intentioned effort by IPMC members to maintain
some semblance of uniformity when it comes to IPMC process,
policy, or terminology, and these folks shouldn't get
labeled as poisonous as a result of those activities.
What happened to Justin wrt OODT was someone trying to
enforce a silly procedural requirement. Directing the
complaints at the person who wrote the email is misguided,
when it is really the process that needs improvement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
