0 Boosts
0 Likes
that's easy to say but what is your practical proposal? should everyone who submitted a github PR get a core vote?
i'm not inherently opposed to your argument but i think we do need to define who are the core contributors to the project and having a commit bit seems like a reasonable way to do that.
we don't actually have to accept feedback from any random person who proposed a patch one time. we should decide what is best for the project as a whole.
@lw @dexter @piero That's where I land too. We have to draw a line somewhere, and 'has a commit bit' is about as good as we can get. That implies sustained engagement with the community and has the side benefit of being easy to define and automate.
If we draw the line anywhere else we'll still have some cases of people who are only 1, 2 or whatever somethings short of being allowed to vote. It is the nature of lines that some people are one the other side of it than you'd want them to be.
![[tj] - knows what your packets are thinking](https://altelectron.org.uk/media/d74e7f59411ccc75c4b3da8f5d2bd34a5d2814edc0cdcabfc24d36c82b593e67.jpg "[tj] - knows what your packets are thinking")
@kp @lw @dexter @piero It is also self tidying, an active commit bit keeps people engaged with the realities of the project.
Otherwise we would have be who haven’t done any FreeBSD development for decades dictating direction by force of personality.
Thankfully we are immune from that and there’s no one in a key position……
Otherwise we would have be who haven’t done any FreeBSD development for decades dictating direction by force of personality.
Thankfully we are immune from that and there’s no one in a key position……
@lw @kp @piero My point exactly.
Find ways to listen to project constituents.
I totally get the fear that “OMG a bunch of randos will tell us what to do” but give your damn constituents, donors, friends, you name it, some credit.