Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> wrote on 06/03/2011 08:02:25 AM:
> > There is a meta-question here: what are the criteria by which the IPMC > should evaluate a proposal? > > 1. "Are there enough people on the proposal to plausibly start out?" > > I think everyone agrees on this as a legitimate criterion. > > 2. "Given the vast size of the codebase, is there any chance of > building a large enough group to maintain and enhance it." > > I fear that this involves the application of a crystal ball, but > others may disagree. > > 3. "How many people are detectable on the two existing projects, as > this will teach us something about (2)" > > No. It won't. Others on this thread of perfectly eloquently explained why. > > So, please make some new threads with some new subjects if you want to > argue my view here or any of the substantive questions. > Done. I think these are good questions. But can you recommend a plausible way to answer your question #1 without at least estimating an answer for question #2? And I'd alter your question #3. The better question, IMHO, is not "how many people are detectable". I don't think anyone has seriously advocated that. But "how many people are active" or "how many people are responsible for 90% of the contributions" or similar questions are indicative. Regards, -Rob --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
