[
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
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
