incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <>
Subject Re: PPMCs [was Re: what are required for contributing to release management]
Date Mon, 02 Oct 2006 12:42:51 GMT

On Oct 1, 2006, at 5:17 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:

> On 10/1/06, Dan Diephouse <> wrote:
>> would however encourage only voting people in after they an  
>> appropriate
>> level of committment and involvement with the project.
> This creates a dividing line by omitting past contributions from the
> discussion which I feel is inappropriate.
> For example, if I were to work on a project for many months at  
> Google Code
> and then propose it to come here, why shouldn't I continue to have  
> a say in
> what the project does?  Why do I need to justify myself all over  
> again?  Why
> aren't my past contributions enough to merit a seat on the PPMC?   
> What gives
> the mentors the power to 'reset' the community and block me from
> participating until I jump through their vague and ill-defined  
> hoops?  --
> justin

++1. If the problem is "piling on" in the committer list
for the proposal *then that should be addressed at the
proposal timeframe and before the podling is accepted*!

As mentioned in a different Email, I'm +1 on adding
in, in the proposal: Mentors | Initial PPMC | Initial
Committers if people want it explicit, but no matter
what, this should be handled before podlings are
accepted, not after.

I think that issue is that some Mentors have different
feelings from what is documented... Recall, after all,
that people from the outside ONLY have access to
what is documented, not our internal discussions...

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

View raw message