Thanks for the feedback. I think I addressed all of it but let me know if I missed something.
David On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 11:38 AM, Michael Hrivnak <[email protected]> wrote: > This looks good. I made a couple of small in-line suggestions by doing > strike-through followed by a replacement. Broader suggestions follow: > > For me, I think the first point could be read as describing a logistical > problem of giving someone a commit bit on a single repo. "you have to give > that person committer rights to all plugins and Pulp core at once." Once we > decide to give someone commit access to a repo (that's the hard part), > actually doing it is very easy on github. An example is that we gave > @mibanescu commit access only to pulp_deb. I think the intent of the first > point is not to make such a logistical argument, but to describe > undesirable outcomes of the current policy. It may be more clear to change > this: > > "First, having a single developer team means that in order to give someone > committer rights to a plugin you have to give that person committer rights > to all plugins and Pulp core at once." > > to this: > > "First, when a new developer is added to the single team, they are given > committer rights to core and all plugins, regardless of which areas they > intend to focus on." > > The latter describes the undesirable outcome, whereas the former could be > read as "The policy is bad because $POLICY." > > The second point ("Second, there are ...") could be divided into two > points. The first half talks about why it's valuable to know who has > responsibility for a plugin. (This looks a lot like the third point.) The > second half talks about the benefits to an individual of being able to > focus on a specific area. I suggest either having 4 total points, or move > the first half of point 2 to be part of point 3. > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Robin Chan <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Looks good. I did add a statement between the "<>" in the next >> sentence. Please feel free to update - just trying to help articulate >> the un-stated for clarity and evaluation of the proposed solution. >> >> Without clear ownership, feature implementation, bugfixes, and code >> review all become more difficult because< it is unclear who needs to >> be involved in the resolution of concerns and who has the final say in >> disputes (?).> >> >> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 9:43 AM, David Davis <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Thanks Robin. I’ve updated the PUP based on your feedback and with the >> help >> > of some other folks on IRC. Please feel free to look it over again. >> > >> > I’ll wait until about Monday October 30th before I proceed with working >> on >> > the rest of the PUP. >> > >> > >> > David >> > >> > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Robin Chan <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi David, >> >> I've added some comments - trying to mostly articulate what I heard >> >> you guys saying last week. I agree this is a good summary, just would >> >> like to work on stating the obvious a little more obviously. >> >> My comments are in red (or whatever this weird muddy pink color is. >> >> Mauve?) >> >> Thanks for getting us started on this. >> >> Robin >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 4:54 PM, David Davis <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> > Last week we talked about forming teams for each Pulp plugin and I >> >> > wanted to >> >> > open up a community discussion around that idea. @bmbouter and I have >> >> > come >> >> > up with a proposed problem statement [0] to kick off this discussion. >> >> > >> >> > We’re looking for feedback from everyone so please feel free to check >> >> > the >> >> > statement out and make edits. Or respond to this email with any >> thoughts >> >> > about it. >> >> > >> >> > After about a week or so, I’ll try to create a PUP based on any >> feedback >> >> > we >> >> > get. >> >> > >> >> > [0] http://pad-theforeman.rhcloud.com/p/pulp-plugin-pup >> >> > >> >> > David >> >> > >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> > Pulp-dev mailing list >> >> > [email protected] >> >> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pulp-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >> > > > > -- > > Michael Hrivnak > > Principal Software Engineer, RHCE > > Red Hat >
_______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
