Ticket #14796 (pike): please commit

Jordan K. Hubbard jkh at apple.com
Tue Apr 1 02:11:07 PDT 2008

I think it's also important to remember that the wording for that was  
probably drafted during an earlier, more idealistic age.  If toning it  
down a little would result in better recruitment counts then I think  
most folks would be all for it, though I think the part about  
demonstrating some tangible interest (in the form of a new Portfile or  
patches to existing ones) is still reasonable since you don't want  
folks just walking up, registering themselves, and then walking away  
again never to return, either.  That just clutters things up.  Perhaps  
there's some way to word this that would be less disheartening.

Your description of yourself and your motivation certainly suggests to  
ME that you should have been a committer already.  What's the hold-up?

- Jordan

On Apr 1, 2008, at 1:58 AM, Florian Ebeling wrote:

>>> There are two few committers for dports/ and REALLY very few  
>>> committers
>> for base/ - I think we should be more liberal in allowing new  
>> committers,
>> being ever mindful of the fact that source control always means you  
>> can back
>> things out (and, as we grow, I think it's also important to be  
>> flexible
>> about that during/because of any dispute).
>> We have tried over the last year to really loosen up the committer
>> requirements, solicit new committers, etc. We've called a number of  
>> times
>> for new submitter applications and basically take anybody who has  
>> shown any
>> sort of commitment or experience with MacPorts. So I'll say it once  
>> more: if
>> you're interested in being a macports committer, please just ask:
>> http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/wiki/NewCommittersGuide.
> I would apply for this but I find the wording in the guide quite
> disheartening. "Prove track record" etc. For me macports is
> interesting, because I am a programmer, work with open source
> packages, and don't fancy to do a simply "make install" in the middle
> of nowhere and then are not able to get rid of the leftovers of my
> experiments. That's where a portfile comes quite handy. And when I'm
> at it and find I had to uprade an existing port in the process, then
> I'm happy to share these results with the community. When this then
> means I file a bug which is being ignored for 6 weeks then I don't do
> this again, I guess. Just add more committers, and also offer commit
> right where you see it fit. There is a bell curve of committers, and
> there are outstanding ones, the majority, and bad ones, and one could
> probably also revoke this right after a warning, if it doesn't work
> out. But people also start slowly and unimpressive, and you probably
> dont want to discourage them further.
> macports is a project which needs a lot of people who do a
> housekeeping, rather boring kind of job, maintaining the ports and
> keep them up to date. So there should probably not too much ceremony
> around this process of commit rights either. It's just not the kind of
> project which will solve world peace and offers fulfillment in your
> life, but it can be a very handy tool for users, if it achieves to
> leverage all the small effeorts of the many.
> Florian
> -- 
> Florian Ebeling
> florian.ebeling at gmail.com

More information about the macports-dev mailing list