Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
RE: [eclipse-pmc] contributed keyword

Seems to me that part of the issue is that there are two mutually incompatible reasons to recognize contributions.
 
One, exemplified by McQ's email, is that we want to thank and acknowledge people for contributing outside of what they normally work on.  This reason tends to the inclusive: the more kudos the better.
 
The other, exemplified by Mike Milinkovich's email, is that (if I correctly understand) the 'contributed' keyword triggers an IP review.  This reason tends to the exclusive: the review is potentially time-consuming and expensive so we only want to do it if absolutely necessary.
 
IANAL, but in the second case it seems that as long as someone has signed (and not subsequently revoked) a committer agreement on any component, we want to NOT mark their contributions as "contributed".
 
So, I think maybe we need to get clear on which of these goals we're trying to achieve, before worrying too much about the means.
 
  -walter


From: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jeff McAffer
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 11:16 AM
To: mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx; eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: eclipse-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx; emo@xxxxxxxxxxx; eclipse-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx; license@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [eclipse-pmc] contributed keyword


The issue really is the scope of "project".  In popular palance "project" is often used to talk about "sub-projects".  Can you clarify your usage?  For clarity on our part, we are using project == top-level project.

A secondary point is that the Eclipse project sub-projects generally manage commit rights on a per component basis.  This mindset is pervasive within the team.  it is how unix group membership is managed, how votes are done, ...  As a result, there is confusion for people as to who is "in" and who is "out".  I'm not saying that things should be any different, just pointing out why there is confusion.  Perhaps this can be clarified by the IP guidelines.

Jeff

Back to the top