From a standpoint other than implementation of this I agree; my sole real issue is how RT accounts get managed, because right now it's effectively 'by hand', which is poor.
But for the rest, and actually for that as well, I think this is a good plan. Derrick On Sep 9, 2012, at 9:15 AM, Simon Wilkinson <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > > Following on from last weeks plethora of resignations and negativity, I want > to propose some ways that we can move forwards, and hopefully reduce the > inertia that has built up in our development process. One of my key aims here > is to reduce the workload on the remaining Gatekeepers, and to remove any > potential for them becoming road blocks in the process. I should add that I'm > proposing all of this in an individual capacity - my employer has had no > input into what follows! > > We should dramatically increase the number of people who can provide +2 > reviews in gerrit. My proposal here is that this would be open to anyone who > has demonstrated an interest in OpenAFS and an understanding of some of the > code. Say anyone who has contributed more than 2 patches. The understanding > would be that people only provide +2 reviews for code that they are confident > is correct, in a section of the codebase that they have a reasonable > knowledge of. > > We should increase the number of people who can submit code. I'd propose > granting submit access to anyone who has a deep understanding of a particular > area of the code, with the understanding being that they only submit changes > to areas that they understand, and are as "responsible" for any breakage > caused by that change as the original author. For example, Andrew for the > fileserver, Marc for the Linux cache manager and so on. Whilst this hugely > opens up the flow of changes into the tree, I don't think it will be > particularly destabilising - I'd expect folk to use their submit powers > responsibly, and we can always revert changes that shouldn't have made it > through. > > We should appoint release managers (other than the gatekeepers) for the 1.4 > and 1.6 stable branches. 1.4 has stagnated for years, and there are a lot of > changes backed up that some people will probably be interested in. I think > there's a danger of 1.6 stagnating in the same way, especially if we're all > off writing new code. Having one, or more, people take on a release manager > role should hopefully help unblock the flow of releases. > > We should open up RT to all comers. For most projects, commenting on issues > in the bug tracking system is the first way that newcomers get started. But > in OpenAFS, commenting on bugs is restricted to a select few. I believe that > we should turn this on its head, and give access to everything (bar delete) > to anyone who wants to be able to comment. We're an open source project, not > a commercial endeavour, and people who are reporting bugs should understand > that some of the responses may be more useful than others. Again, I would > expect this to be self policing. > > Thoughts, comments? > > Cheers, > > Simon. > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenAFS-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel > _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
