> -----Original Message----- > From: Neil Horman [mailto:nhorman at tuxdriver.com] > Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 7:12 PM > To: Mcnamara, John <john.mcnamara at intel.com> > Cc: dev at dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Proposal for a new Committer model > > > ... > > > > B) Designate alternates to serve as backups for the maintainer when > > they are unavailable. This provides high-availablility, and sounds > > very much like your proposal, but in the interests of clarity, there > > is still a single maintainer at any one time, it just may change to > > ensure the continued merging of patches, if the primary maintainer isn't > available. > > Ideally however, those backup alternates arent needed, because most of > > the primary maintainers work in merging pull requests, which are done > > based on the trust of the submaintainer, and done during a very > > limited window of time. This also partially addreses multi-vendor > > fairness if your subtree maintainers come from multiple participating > companies. > > > > Regards > > Neil > > > > > > > > Soo, I feel like we're wandering away from this thread. Are you going to > make a change to the comitter model?
Hi, Yes. I think we have consensus on the main parts. I'll re-draft a proposal that we can discuss and then add to the contributors guide. John