incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul King <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Groovy Incubation proposal
Date Thu, 12 Mar 2015 10:17:29 GMT

I would have thought that graduation would be all about showing that whatever list of committers
we have (big or small) is working well? Having a large number of committers certainly makes
sense with a subversion mindset but it's possibly an anti-pattern with a DVCS mindset (at
least for a stable language in any case)?

The Groovy community has always valued the actual code contribution more than who the person
was who contributedthe code. I hope we can continue in that fashion.

Obviously, there are logistics concerns, you need enough committers to handle the administrative
tasks involved (and that will change with less full-time people contributing on that side
perhaps), so we should expect changes. And, the voting is a bit different to what we have
done in the past, so making that work well will be important too. I just hope we are targeting
a working system rather than some magic number of committers.

Cheers, Paul.

On 12/03/2015 7:57 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> Hi,
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 8:08 PM, jan i <> wrote:
>> ...The proposal talks several places about a vibrant community and the initial
>> commiters are only 5...
> As others have said this was discussed while preparing the proposal. I
> also agree that it's fine to include only the "core" Groovy committers
> to enter incubation, as usual it will be their task to grow that
> community before graduating.
> The alternative would be to start with a huge list of initial
> committers ("everybody who contributed more than X to Groovy") and
> before graduating reduce it to the list of people who actually
> contributed during incubation, but that's much more work IMO.
> -Bertrand

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.

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

View raw message