Re: [technology-pmc] EPF: Official voting record - new Committers - Batc

[Bjorn Freeman-Benson <bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Per,
Thanks for your reply.  I tried calling but got your voicemail, so I'll e-reply instead.

Yes, your logic makes sense. You believe that these new committer candidates meet the requirements for demonstrated contribution and that if they prove not to active in the future, you will "ask them to excuse themselves". Good. 

I would like to make sure that as the project progresses the new committers have demonstrated actual contributions rather than a promise of future contribution. I realize that during the startup phase this is difficult, but once the project has started there is a well-defined process for proving oneself through contribution before becoming a committer. Thanks.

Thus you have the Technology PMCs approval for the new committers.  (Have fun filling out the new committer form for each one http://www.eclipse.org/legal/newcommitter.php item 3 - sorry there is no "bulk mode".)

Bjorn (for the Technology PMC)

below you find an overview of the 21 (some only suggested at this stage) committers and why they are committers. Also, I outline my thinking around committers. I would be happy to receive further guidance on whether my thinking is appropriate.

In short, if you look at the current downloadable, what is there has all been produced by the 11 IBMers, so that would not warrant any others to be committers. However, each of the other 10 committers, and their company share some common characteristics:
- They have done a non-significant time and financial committment to EPF through participation in face-to-face and other meetings
- They have strong credentials with past proven track record
- They have made clear committments in terms of what contributions to do in the future
- They have been active participants in discussions, showcasing good judgment and skills

Now, this does not mean that they will live up to their (and their companies) promisses, but at this stage of the project, I would rather go with somewhat of a leap of face, and then in ~6 months from now, ask the committers that have not delivered upon their promisses to excuse themselves.

I also do understand that as the project moves into a development mode, new participants needs to showcase past deliverables, rather than active participation and committments on what to deliver.

Does the above make sense?