Re: [technology-pmc] Committer Nominations

[Gunnar Wagenknecht <gunnar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 12 Jun 2016, at 17:45, Wayne Beaton <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I agree with your list. Can I assume, though, that we still need to have an actual statement of merit that summarizes the manner of the contribution?

+1 

FWIW, I think that we can generate a reasonable default merit statement 80% of the time.

https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=366435

+1

In case of migration of existing code, I'm ok with having the information provided as part of the CQ.

Even worse, there is a +1 vote from another committer with the comment "I don't know who this person is." (!).

I'm inclined to interpret this as a 0 and an indication that we need to provide better education for new committers and project team.s

So back to the drawing board ... it sounds like we need to look at those more carefully and decide on a case by case base.

-Gunnar