[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
[platform-core-dev] Updated Platform Workspace Committer FAQ
|
Thanks John,
I like your process description a lot.
Taking the chance of the moment, I also answered some
of the questions I posted to that FAQ a long time ago (tagged with "Q:" and "A:"
now.
There's still a couple old "Q:" tags unanswered, in case
somebody has time reviewing them.
Thanks,
--
Martin Oberhuber, Senior Member of Technical
Staff, Wind River
direct
+43.662.457915.85 fax +43.662.457915.6
Your point 1) sounds good to me. I
have taken a stab at drafting something in our committer FAQ. I added some other
points to look for in new committers. Feel free to add/edit/adjust, etc.
http://wiki.eclipse.org/Eclipse/Workspace/Committer_FAQ#Becoming_a_Committer
John
"Oberhuber, Martin"
<Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent by:
platform-core-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
04/21/2010 07:29 AM
Please respond
to "Eclipse Platform Core component developers list."
<platform-core-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
To
| "Eclipse Platform Core component
developers list." <platform-core-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
cc
|
|
Subject
| RE: [platform-core-dev] -1 for
JamesBlackburnon
eclipse.platform.coreby John
Arthorne |
|
Hi all,
After thinking more about this, here is a suggestion to
simplify matters:
1. For the future, only consider committed
contributions when
nominating new committers (and post this as a
guideline on
Wiki or so).
I didn't have this idea
before, but it greatly simplifies
process since committed
contributions are much easier to
find and they are known to be
reviewed and considered
"good" already. So the work of finding,
enumerating and
evaluating contributions is much simpler and fair to
all.
2. In the concrete case of James, everybody should feel
free
to vote based on their own assessment. Nobody should
feel
pushed into any direction.
For James, I have done
the work of finding, enumerating
and evaluating even uncommitted
contributions already,
and there are arguments in favor of considering
them. All
the information has been publicly posted. I guess I
wouldn't do it again based on (1), but now that the
information is there, we could as well use it.
If people think we
should better wait, that's fine though.
I prefer a clean and honest
vote over any rushing.
Thanks,
--
Martin Oberhuber, Senior Member
of Technical Staff, Wind River
direct +43.662.457915.85 fax
+43.662.457915.6
-----Original Message-----
From:
platform-core-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:platform-core-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Oberhuber,
Martin
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 7:44
AM
To: Eclipse Platform Core component developers list.
Subject: RE:
[platform-core-dev] -1 for JamesBlackburnon
eclipse.platform.coreby John
Arthorne
> I understand that your decision Martin is caused by the
fact that
> there are fixes that you or James want to squeeze in
3.6.
No, absolutely not!
Both James and I understand very well the
importance of stability, and
he explicitly told me on his own account that
he'd want to wait for
other committer's approval before actually making
changes to the code.
On all of the bugs where I asked, James commented
that he'd rather wait
for 3.7 than push it in prematurely.
You'll see this
in the comments on
bug
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=306822
The proposal
of making James a Committer is related to the case that I
recently reviewed
some of his patches and thought like "oh my, this
should really have been
considered much earlier".
Why hadn't it been considered earlier? Because
nobody took the time
reviewing even additions of Unittests that would have
been an asset at
any rate. How can this be improved? By adding more people to
the team.
People like James, who have publicly shown diligence, understanding
and
good judgement.
I understand John's arguing of waiting for more
public record (but note
that John missed some very good contributions, as
well as the time span
when these contributions were originally made). Like
Doug, I do not
understand the value of waiting per se.
Szymon, I
really appreciate your offering direct contact to get things
reviewed early.
But I think we'll be even more effective if there's more
committers that can
handle simple things themselves, such that you can
focus on the hard things.
Quite frankly, I nominated James because I see
potential for him helping out
with things that I don't have time for in
the longer run.
I'm not
going to argue much more about this committer nomination, and if
people think
we should really wait, well, we can wait since there's more
urgent things to
be done than arguing among ourselves. But I did want to
set our (my)
motivation
straight.
Martin
_______________________________________________
platform-core-dev
mailing
list
platform-core-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-core-dev
_______________________________________________
platform-core-dev
mailing
list
platform-core-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-core-dev