From general-return-8463-apmail-incubator-general-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org Thu Mar 16 17:14:09 2006 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 31703 invoked from network); 16 Mar 2006 17:14:05 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 16 Mar 2006 17:14:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 16720 invoked by uid 500); 16 Mar 2006 17:13:54 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 16313 invoked by uid 500); 16 Mar 2006 17:13:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 16139 invoked by uid 99); 16 Mar 2006 17:13:52 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 16 Mar 2006 09:13:52 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [199.237.51.194] (HELO green.rootmode.com) (199.237.51.194) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 16 Mar 2006 09:13:51 -0800 X-ClientAddr: 68.171.62.46 Received: from [192.168.15.100] (68-171-62-46.vnnyca.adelphia.net [68.171.62.46]) by green.rootmode.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id k2GHDLIT025924; Thu, 16 Mar 2006 12:13:21 -0500 In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v746.2) X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <638B4E0A-127D-4C24-8837-5D0AA517ACA4@iq80.com> Cc: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Dain Sundstrom Subject: Re: ActiveMQ and ServiceMix reports Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 09:13:25 -0800 To: servicemix-dev@geronimo.apache.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.746.2) X-RootMode-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-RootMode-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: dain@iq80.com X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Mar 15, 2006, at 7:04 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote: > Hiram Chirino wrote: > >> If the ActiveMQ / ServiceMix community do decide to go under some >> other TLP, I'm sure it would not take long for the active >> participants of the community to asked to Join the TLP's PMC. > > I would certainly hope that they would want to be, yes. Hence ... > >> I believe that merging ActiveMQ and Servicemix into Geronimo >> community and PMC is easier than most cases since there are >> all ready several active ActiveMQ/ServiceMix commiters thar >> are Geronimo PMC members. > > At this moment, Geronimo has 19 PMC members and 7 commmiters who > are not on > the PMC. That does, of course, change over time. > > The overlap of ActiveMQ and ServiceMix with the Geronimo PMC has 10 > PMC > members. ActiveMQ has 13 additional people who are not on the > Geronimo PMC. > Adding ServiceMix is just another 4 (17 total), as there is a huge > overlap > between ActiveMQ and ServiceMix. > > I have no idea how active any of these people are on any of the > projects in > any capacity. Dims appears to feel that there is a large number of > committers in name only, but I haven't looked at all so for the > sake of > discussion, let's assume that they are all active. Adding ActiveMQ > and > ServiceMix to Geronimo could increase the size of Geronimo's > community from > 26 to ~40, and assuming a comparable ratio, the PMC from 19 to 30+. > > So is Geronimo prepared to take such actions? Should it be, at > this time? > And what would that do for diversity, since a lot of people appear > to work > for the same company? As a Geronimo PMC member, my current feelings on granting commit and pmc membership fall into three categories: existing G committers, active committers and inactive committers. Existing G committers are a non issue. Active committers should absolutely get commit access to G and assuming they remain active during the incubation period (several committs) they should be added to the G pmc. Inactive committers should not get added to the PMC. As for commit, I think this is a case by case basis. If the person committed major work in the past, I give them commit, on the other hand if they only committed one file, I wouldn't give them commit. The difficult decisions will be in the middle, and I will look for guidance from AMQ and SM on these people. As we begin to discuss the final graduation of these projects into Geronimo, I may be convinced of another set of guidelines. -dain --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org