incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From C├ędric Champeau <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Groovy Incubation proposal
Date Wed, 11 Mar 2015 20:11:38 GMT
A good answer to this is to take a look at who actually contributed for the
past 4 years:
and you will see that there are not so many regular contributors. GitHub
helped us a lot recently to have more contributions, from simple typos to
complex bug fixes, but one should not forget that a contribution in GitHub
doesn't mean that the author is a committer : it's just that authors are

While we have a lot of contributors, only a few of us have a deep knowledge
of Groovy internals. We will certainly encourage regular contributors to
become committers (we already think of some), as long as those are
following quality standards, take care of important things like maintaining
backwards compatibility etc... We had more than 5 committers in the past,
but lots of them just stopped pushing code, for various reasons. In the end
I would be the first pleased to see more committers, but meritocracy is
also important. And to be clear, we do not think only about code:
contributions like documentation or tests are also very important.

2015-03-11 20:17 GMT+01:00 Roman Shaposhnik <>:

> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:08 PM, jan i <> wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > Having just skimmed the proposal, that in general look good, one thing
> > caught my eye.
> >
> > The proposal talks several places about a vibrant community and the
> initial
> > commiters are only 5.
> This, is a GREAT question! Thank you so much for raising it. While
> preparing a proposal I've struggled with the same issue, because looking
> at this: makes
> me wonder exactly the same thing.
> In the end, we decided to go ahead with the proposal the way it is and
> position
> the initial list of committers more as a PMC for the project.
> That still doesn't answer your (or mine! ;-)) question of what's the best
> way
> to make sure than anybody who feels like they have a stake in the project
> and have contributed in the past get invited.
> There are a few alternatives I could see, but I would really
> appreciate Incubator's
> collective wisdom on what would be the best way to proceed here given
> that Groovy is a very mature project with a lot of contributors in the
> past.
> Some of whom may or may not wish to keep contributing.
> Thanks,
> Roman.

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message