Then I would expect that leader (or at
least one of leaders) of the project should be someone very active
around the project. GlassFish doesn't have such active leader.
That's a good point indeed, and it can be clearly seen when looking at the activity graph. Looking back two full years:
We have 5 active committers, a number of contributors, and a number of committers who haven't actually committed anything at all, or haven't done so in years. (Do note though that this graph doesn't capture everything, as people can also be active in the project by doing reviews or managing the CI, doing releases, updating the Eclipse project pages, etc).
During the platform calls we discussed doing some house cleaning for various Eclipse projects, and the general consensus seemed to be that the leads and committer list should reflect the current situation better. Over time, committers and leads have lost interest, moved to other projects, and what have you. I think this election was started in response to that.
I do agree that it's unfortunate that a bare template has been sent out, though all the most active committers voted, and they clearly don't need any evidence about David's contributions and input.
The vote could be redone, sending out a normal mail, but for those active committers it obviously won't make a difference.
I'm personally +0 about restarting the vote, but if it's needed I'm okay with it.
Kind regards,
Arjan Tijms
