Re: [Pulp-dev] Plugin teams problem statement

Thanks! Another thought after reading with the updates: It's easy to assume in our discussion that "having the commit bit" == "being responsible for maintaining a thing". But the latter is a state a developer can be in, while the former is one of multiple potential ways to designate or assign

Re: [Pulp-dev] Plugin teams problem statement

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 wrote: > This looks good. I made a couple of small in-line suggestions by doing > strike-through followed by a

Re: [Pulp-dev] Plugin teams problem statement

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

Re: [Pulp-dev] Plugin teams problem statement

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

Re: [Pulp-dev] Plugin teams problem statement

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

[Pulp-dev] Plugin teams problem statement

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