This has been an interesting and illuminating conversation, but I
thought I would point out a few things about Eclipse projects:
IBM donated the OCL code to Eclipse when the modeling project
was
started almost four years ago.
Now we are going to get shutout of our own
project?
Once a company open sources a code base, that code base ceases to be
"controlled by that company" and becomes "controlled by the committers"
on the project. You aren't being shut out of *your* project because the
project is not yours to control: it is an Eclipse open source project
controlled by the committers on that project. The issue at hand is that
the sole committer is resigning and the PMC is appointing new
committers to control the project. The PMC is using (as far as I can
tell) the correct policy of creating the new committer list from
existing contributors.
I offered to take on commit rights on behalf of IBM and as the
delegate
for IBM.
One (or all) of these three will have to become committers again so
that IBM will have at least one committer on the project.
One committer from IBM on these projects is mandatory.
Under the Eclipse Bylaws, written mostly by IBM, there is no such thing
as "commit rights for a company" - commit rights are given to
individuals and travel with those individuals irrespective of their
employment. Commit rights are not a right of employment and companies,
Eclipse members or otherwise, have no say in the granting of commit
rights.
We require a presence
You *desire* a presence and you *request* a presence, but under the
Eclipse Bylaws and processes, you do not require a presence nor can you
demand one (well, ok, you can make any demands you want, but the PMC
has no obligation to listen to those demands). The only valid argument
you can make is that person X has been a contributor and has proven
themselves to be sufficiently valuable to be appointed as a committer.
- Bjorn
|