incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dan Diephouse <>
Subject Re: Problem with commit rights on Celtixfire
Date Fri, 29 Sep 2006 15:31:00 GMT
Hi Jim,

Can you please explain what the criteria was for removing people from 
the comitter list? Can you also detail who was removed? Can you also 
explain why this hasn't been communicated to everyone on the dev list so 
far? And why I have only heard about the final decision third hand from 
this email and an offhand mention in Bo's email? I am OK with the PMC's 
authority as thats what I signed up for at Apache, but I feel that if 
they make such an important decision as this they should at least 
communicate the above.

- Dan

Jim Jagielski wrote:

> Without discussing anything regarding the initial list
> and who should or should not have been on it, it needs
> to be reminded that the bar to committership for Incubator
> podlings is necessarily a bit lower than for real
> PMCs. After all, one thing the podling must work on is
> increasing the community.
> I would recommend that anyone who does not have
> commit privs but feel they should, to send Email to
> the dev list with url pointers to patches, etc
> which serve to indicate the work they've done.
> As for any "internal" discussions which may or may not
> have been going on, let me also state that it is
> really against the ASF to make any sort of development
> decisions behind closed door, but that occasionally
> PMCs do need to talk privately within themselves,
> and any leaking of that information is considered
> a VERY bad thing to do.
> On Sep 29, 2006, at 5:06 AM, Mark Little wrote:
>> Redhat were one of the supporters of the Celtixfire incubator  
>> project and discussed with the proposers to add Kevin Conner and  
>> myself to the list of initial commiters. As part of this, our names  
>> were included in the proposal. Both Kevin and I are working on  
>> Redhat related projects and see a lot of potential collaboration  
>> possibilities with Celtixfire.
>> At the formation of the project all members of the group were asked  
>> to submit signed ICLAs, which we did via fax and snail-mail.  
>> However, due to a problem with the fax, after 4 weeks they hadn't  
>> turned up and we re-submitted. This time, at the start of  September, 
>> the ICLAs were acknowledged and we were told our  commiter status was 
>> in the works. However, despite several follow  up emails, commiter 
>> status was not given and no answer for the  delay provided.
>> Yesterday we learnt that there has been some internal decision to  
>> limit the number of commiters and not take into account the listed  
>> individuals on the initial commiters list. Is this normal  procedure? 
>> Have we been waiting 2 months based on false  assumptions? We 
>> believed that, as supporters of the submission, we  had already gone 
>> through the process of arguing who should, or  should not, be an 
>> initial commiter, so to be presented with a  different result (and 
>> one which appears to have been conducted  behind closed doors) is 
>> frustrating.
>> Clearly this is not a case of "piling on", as joining the project  
>> was discussed with the project submitters prior to the formation of  
>> the group. Something seems wrong here; if there was no intention of  
>> adding us (and perhaps others we don't know about) as initial  
>> commiters, why did the project submitter include us? On what basis  
>> where these accounts not set up? Is random denial of initial  
>> commiters typical?
>> Thanks,
>> Mark.
>> -- 
>> Director of Standards, Development Manager, JBoss (a Division of  
>> Redhat).
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

Dan Diephouse
(616) 971-2053
Envoi Solutions LLC

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message