incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <>
Subject Re: Apache Incubator Proposal: Meritocracy and Committers for non-coders?
Date Thu, 02 Jun 2011 14:06:11 GMT
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 09:43,  <> wrote:
> Simon Brouwer <> wrote on 06/02/2011 09:21:53 AM:
>> Some concern has been expressed that, if the meritocratic system in
>> Apache is based on code contribution only, those community members are
>> not able to fully become part of the Apache project or
>> the Apache community.
> Excellent question, Simon!

As stated in the other thread, we have plenty of non-coding contributors.

> I've certainly seen QA committers.  I assume translators would be similar.

Yeah. We have plenty in the Apache Subversion project, and I imagine
it is the same for other projects. The translators have commit access
in order to check-in their new language bundles.

>  If you are contributing assets to the project, asserts that are checked
> in, and which should be peer reviewed and maintained, then the project
> needs a way to identify the project members are have the authority to
> check in these assets, but also the responsibility to review and check in
> the assets contributed by others.

Anybody that wants to commit to the ASF svn repository needs an
ICLA[1] on file before they can get a committer account and access.
Whether they're going to commit documentation, code, translations,
website pages, marketing materials, or $whatever.

>  Please someone correct me if I'm wrong,
> but I don't think Apache makes a distinction between someone who
> contributes C++ code versus Java code versus translations versus test
> cases versus help and documentation.  They all need to be contributed and
> reviewed and checked in.


> What isn't clear to me are things like the following:
> 1) A strong QA member, who does manual testing, enters defect reports,
> does smoke tests, etc.  How do they advance in the meritocracy?  Is there
> any opportunity for them to be recognized as a committer and eventually as
> a PMC member?


> 2) Ditto for someone working on marketing oriented aspects of the project,
> helping to arrange conferences, working on logos, etc.?


> 3) Ditto for someone on the build/release management side, for example,
> liaising with Linux distros to get them to include OpenOffice releases.


> All of these roles (and others which I've surely missed) are critical to
> the project's success.  How does a project typically recognize the lead
> contributors in these areas?  Is it a case of "If it is not checked into
> the repository, it doesn't count" ??  I hope note.

Continued, sustained interest and contribution to the project.
Somebody who understands the goals of the projects, works towards them
in some way, and works well with others in the community... they
should receive recognition as a committer (if necessary) and as a PMC
Member. The latter are the people who steer the project. More can be
found here:



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

View raw message