Community
Participate
Working Groups
With Bug 440316 we list historical committers. I think having Committer Emeritus is therefore not necessary anymore. I suggest to remove this, as I don't think the distinction is that important.
Adding Wayne.
Emeritus is intended to suggest a deeper or more profound former commitment to the project. Frankly, however, I don't mind making changes that simplify things. I'd like to get more input before we decide. Lars, can you ask the Architecture Council to weigh in?
+1 for removing this vague and subjective "Emeritus" notion.
+1 for removing committer emeritus status.
+1
I think the distinction is meaningful. It can be relatively easy to become a committer - for example on e4 anyone who announced an interest would be given immediate commit rights in the past, even if they never made any commits. On the other hand you have some past contributors that have devoted many years of their career and had a significant impact on a project or piece of technology, or who created the technology in the first place. I think it is nice to have a way to recognize and honor such major "lifetime" contributions. I know the one time we did this on the Eclipse top-level project the decision was taken seriously and included a rationale on why they were being recognized (https://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/eclipse-dev/msg09065.html).
John, if a project does wish to do those special attributions - isn't it better if it has a dedicated "thank you" page on its website instead of putting some flag in a database?
We briefly discussed this in our Eclipse PMC call today and all agreed that we would like to keep the committer emeritus status. See https://wiki.eclipse.org/Eclipse/PMC#Meeting_Minutes for details.
(In reply to Gunnar Wagenknecht from comment #7) > John, if a project does wish to do those special attributions - isn't it > better if it has a dedicated "thank you" page on its website instead of > putting some flag in a database? The PMI is supposed to show all information regarding a project. Removing the flag would just create more work for the project lead who wants to recognize a committer emeritus.
Thanks Dani, marking as wontfix.
Reopening and moving to Architecture Council for a while. With the retirement of the portal and the infrastructure that supports the "emeritification" of committers, I find myself with no interest in dedicating EF development resources to reimplementing this in the PMI (which means that I'll have to invest manual effort in so-designating individuals). Further, we seem to have support from other members of the community to retire the notion (the Eclipse PMC's opinion is valued, but they don't get to decide on everybody's behalf). Frankly, unless there is overwhelming outcry that implementing this is critically important, I am likely going to push through with retiring the concept.
(In reply to Wayne Beaton from comment #11) > Reopening and moving to Architecture Council for a while. > > With the retirement of the portal and the infrastructure that supports the > "emeritification" of committers, I find myself with no interest in > dedicating EF development resources to reimplementing this in the PMI (which > means that I'll have to invest manual effort in so-designating individuals). > > Further, we seem to have support from other members of the community to > retire the notion (the Eclipse PMC's opinion is valued, but they don't get > to decide on everybody's behalf). > > Frankly, unless there is overwhelming outcry that implementing this is > critically important, I am likely going to push through with retiring the > concept. The current state is not acceptable as it gives a wrong picture. Before retiring the old portal people could be marked. Those people are currently listed in the new project portal as Committer Emeritus. I'm fine to remove that section as it lists information that can't be updated anymore. Otherwise we need a way to mark newly retired committers.
No changes are expected here.
