Marius has been an indispensable member of the Galaxy community for a while - his contributions to tools, planemo, and ansible roles have been signficant and invaluable.
However over the last several months he has taken a very active role on the Galaxy central code base itself. He has worked through a number of very intricate bugs to tool shed, tooling, and workflow code - consistently providing high quality and important bug fixes. Beyond that he has made signficant enhancements to the testing of Galaxy and workflow available to tool developers leveraging local tool sheds. He also is very active in the review of issues and pull requests, perhaps the most important role of Galaxy committer group members.
Ross Lazarus has done a lot for Galaxy for a long time and has been a fantastic presence in the community. He is now retired and has no intention of touching the code or reviewing pull requests so I think it is best to remove him from the committers list. I have contacted him to confirm this and he has no problem with his removal from this group.
Just to reiterate, this isn't a condemnation of any kind, from the organization policies - "Periodically, active members may review this group and request inactive members are removed - this should not be interpreted as a condemnation of these inactive members but merely as a reflection of a desire to keep this group focused enough to remain effective."
on how reversions are to be handled. This is in response to the events
transpiring in #433 and #449.
Additionally this PR corrects the misspelling of the pluralization of
the word veto.
This is a direct follow up, per procedures with a single squashed commit, of #450.
- State and clarfiy my (@jmchilton's) understanding of existing informal pull request policies.
- Add a list of committers who should have "commit" access to the repository according to my understanding of the team meeting held on 5/28/2015.
- Add language describing how the Galaxy project might manage commit access and project governance going forward in accordance with my understanding of the team meeting discussion.
This fills in a lot of gaps left by informal policies and informal discussions and I am eager to see much discussion on each of these topics. Much of the language and structure is borrowed with heavy modification from the Django and Apache variants of these documents.
Also - congrats to @nsoranzo, @erasche, and @bgruening who the team unanimously voted to grant commit access to.
E Rasche