On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 12:22 PM, José Guilherme Vanz < guilherme....@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm very new in the community and I do not know all the issues the > community already faced. My advance apologies if I'm saying bullshit... > > If is always difficult to find I shepherd, change the approach can be a > good ideia. Maybe remove this burocracy of a shepherd and keep just the > review board and reviews. You would just remove the issue by one step, adding the frustration that you have now invested the time in fixing the issue, but no one really cares enough to give a review. > Once a new patch is uploaded the > commiters/reviewers should review and give their feedback. All the history > will be in the Jira and review board. > What you are saying is entirely correct and not b**t; but the issue is not about "finding a shepherd," but rather around broadening community participation and transparency around priorities. Neither, paradoxically, seems to be a priority here - especially when 90%+ of committers now belong to the same commercial organization. AFAIK most of the organizations who use Mesos in Production now have their own private forks, maintaining their own set of patches, which we can't get committed upstream, for varied and, mostly, opaque reasons. Needless to say, it's a huge hassle and makes people wonder whether we'd be better off with a different scheduler... > On Fri, 13 May 2016 at 14:45 Cong Wang <cw...@twopensource.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 8:54 PM, José Guilherme Vanz > > <guilherme....@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Even I did not find a shepherd, I've uploaded a first version of the > > patch > > > in the review board. > > > > You are not alone. This is the biggest problem of this community which > > people here refuse to see, especially when we are not in Mesospshere. ;) > > >
