| RE: [eclipse.org-planning-council] RE:[eclipse.org-membership-at-large] Eclipse Project AnnouncementandProject Review Schedule |
|
I think I covered this in my other email. I disagree about “stepping forward” (outward attempt to get it)
vs. recruiting (inward attempt to get out). There should already been enough
evidence who the additional potential engineers and architects are. From: eclipse.org-planning-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:eclipse.org-planning-council-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike
Milinkovich Doug, That is a really good question. And I hope it was meant seriously,
because it is a very important question for the Eclipse community. Diversity on
E4 is a “must have” for the future health of Eclipse. BUT: actions speak louder than words. And that applies to both
sides of this question. Anyone who has the ability to make the very serious time
commitment to becoming a committer on E4 should step forward. IBM, Innoopract
and Code9 have indicated that they are going to make highly skilled people with
significant time commitments available to move this project ahead. It would be
wonderful if others, including Wind River, find themselves able to make the
same commitment. I have spoken to the leaders on this project who happen to be from
IBM and they have told me that they agree with you. E4 provides an opportunity
to raise the diversity on the platform project. Over time, it will be their
responsibility to ensure that their actions back that up as well. And yes, that
does mean living up to the diversity standard by which all other projects are
judged. Actions, not words are going to make E4 successful. At the risk of starting a fight, is anyone else bothered by the
fact that this initial committer list is composed almost exclusively of IBM
engineers? It seems that it’s time for
the platform project to live up to the diversity standard by which all other
projects are judged. Perhaps Eclipse 4.0 is the time to make that change? |