Robert Muir wrote >>> You generally have many transients and an active smaller core. I think > this is not at all uncommon. > > I think it significantly helps when we have committers that unofficially > "take ownership" over certain areas, for lack of a better word. Just > meaning they look out for it and know it well and so its easier for them > to > review and commit people's patches. They are way more productive here than > old-timer busy core developers because that area of the codebase becomes > their itch. This lets us scale better. > > So with the codebase this big, I'm not concerned with how many people are > "core". I think its even better to have lots of people that look out for > specific areas and know them well. I'm interested in ways we can encourage > more of this.
I agree with this a lot. Clearly I "own" spatial. Maybe we should have a roster somewhere of parts of the codebase that have an owner. It could be useful to people not "in the know" on who to contact, and perhaps it might inspire more involvement for less involved committers. The other day I assigned myself to the "modules/spatial" component in Jira, overwriting Ryan. Nobody is assigned to any other component. I'm not sure if it's a good idea to auto-assign a Jira issue by component lead or not as it might suggest that person intends to work on it soon. But, it at least would more actively trigger awareness of an issue than might slip through the cracks, and frustrate a contributor. Hopefully the Jira notification scheme notifies a component lead on issue creation. ~ David ----- Author: http://www.packtpub.com/apache-solr-3-enterprise-search-server/book -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Active-4-x-branches-tp4022609p4023183.html Sent from the Lucene - Java Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
