incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <>
Subject Re: Policy on Initial Committership
Date Mon, 09 Oct 2006 12:34:40 GMT

On Oct 8, 2006, at 9:55 AM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:

> On 10/8/06, Jim Jagielski <> wrote:
>> However, in that case I would really like to see it that
>> if committers from other ASF projects read the proposal
>> and have a sincere interest in helping, that they be
>> included in the initial list, since I think it helps
>> bootstrap the community process right off the bat.
> Noel and I were chatting about this last night, and my position is  
> that I'm
> okay with 'piling on' by ASF folks *if* the podling community is  
> happy with
> that.  If the podling folks do not want them on the initial list  
> and desire
> that they earn their commit bits through actual participation, I'm  
> okay with
> that too.

Of course.

> Noel's said that being the arbitrator of who is on the list should  
> be the
> role of the Champion and I think that's probably as good as we're  
> going to
> get.  But, by the time the Incubator PMC votes on a proposal, that  
> list must
> be set (i.e. no deletions after the vote concludes).  -- justin

The role of the Champion alone? Certainly the proposal is an
organic document that the entire podling-to-be is involved
with, so whereas the Champion has a role to play, I
don't think it's their responsibility to believe that
they know better than the community. How many champions
are truly so deeply involved in the soon-to-be-transplanted
community that they can make such decisions?

Of course, yes, the Champion does have the responsibility
to handle "piling on" cases... But if they need to do
it with a hammer, then the proposal's in bad shape

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

View raw message