Lewis asked me on IRC to reply, so a short reaction.
On 4 January 2011 19:36, Lewis Cawte <lewiscawte(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
* Be active on the IRC channel or mailing list and
have submitted a few good
patches via Sourceforge or other methods.
* Keep it flexible, don't get strict on commit access, we haven't been up
before. It'd be nice to see a flow of new developers.
* Gained community consensus via the mailing list. "The request for commit
access can be simultaneous with the mail to the mailing list"
I would change community consensus to 'no objection'. It's OK if code
quality isn't perfect, it just shouldn't be horrible.
Additionally, 'submitted a few good patches' really depends on what
the person wants to do. In general, I'm OK with giving anyone access,
as long as the person is reactive to comments on his/hers commits.
This is, IMO, reallly more important than having lots of patches
Last, but not least - people who have access to the other repositories
also have access to the pwb repository. I think
it would be a good idea to give these people 'official' access - i.e.
if you commit to mediawiki, you're allowed to commit to