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).
|