incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Newcomer, Eric" <>
Subject RE: Policy on Initial Committership
Date Tue, 03 Oct 2006 19:22:36 GMT
I think there is still a lot of misunderstanding here.  I think Bill's
suggestion is a good one, and perhaps we should do it for CeltiXfire

I do not think there has been any piling on.  We reviewed each name on
the list carefully and a name only went on the list if we were convinced
that the individual had either (1) contributed previously to either
Celtix or Xfire or (2) expressed a genuine, specific interest in a
potential contribution of value to the new project.

-----Original Message-----
From: Roy T. Fielding [] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 2:09 PM
Subject: Re: Policy on Initial Committership

On Oct 3, 2006, at 7:08 AM, Newcomer, Eric wrote:

> As we have also seen in the discussions on this topic it is natural  
> for
> a project to review and revise the committers list as it progresses.
> But let's at least get CXF off to a good start!

Or kill it now and let the proposers compile a list of individuals
that have actually earned commit rights on the project.  My point was
that the Incubator PMC approved a proposal.  Thus, if any corrections
are needed prior to initial set-up, the proposal would need to be voted
on again (and I suspect would attract more attention the second time).
Alternatively, set it up with a real PPMC consisting of everyone
on the list and let that group decide an objective criteria (within
the limitations imposed by the ASF) for who should have commit access.

BTW, somewhere along the line people started calling this project CXF.
That is a fine name, but isn't the one in the proposal.


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

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

View raw message