cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Animesh Chaturvedi <animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com>
Subject RE: [DISCUSS] Primary maintainers?
Date Fri, 03 May 2013 18:59:10 GMT
Yes I will merge primary and secondary maintainers into one column. I also started a separate
thread yesterday on JIRA component based filters and email subscriptions so that whoever is
interested can be notified on potential opportunities to work on.   When you get a chance
please review and provide feedback

Animesh

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Noah Slater [mailto:nslater@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, May 03, 2013 11:40 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Primary maintainers?
> 
> Yep, I thought so.
> 
> So can we just remove this column, and have a single column then?
> 
> 
> On 3 May 2013 19:38, Animesh Chaturvedi
> <animesh.chaturvedi@citrix.com>wrote:
> 
> > Noah I had already withdrawn auto-assignment in the same thread [1]
> > with following comment
> >
> >         [Animesh>] +1,  that is the reason Apache projects do not use
> > @author tag. I take back my original argument of auto-assigning based
> > on  maintainers list. I did a search but did not find any community
> > using auto-assignment. The community argument  wins.
> >
> >
> > Regarding removing the primary maintainers I agree that it can be
> > dropped and just call it maintainers or other inviting name.
> >
> >
> > [1]
> >
> http://markmail.org/message/udidz5fsgolng2xs?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Einc
> > ubator%2Ecloudstack-dev+auto+assignment+from
> > :"Animesh+Chaturvedi"&page=1
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Noah Slater [mailto:nslater@apache.org]
> > > Sent: Friday, May 03, 2013 6:04 AM
> > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > > Subject: [DISCUSS] Primary maintainers?
> > >
> > > Hi folks,
> > >
> > > While reading the meeting minutes, I found a link to:
> > >
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Current+Maint
> > > ai
> > > ners+Per+Component
> > >
> > > I feel concerned about the distinction between "primary maintainer"
> > > and "secondary maintainer". I believe this could discourage
> > > contribution. So
> > I
> > > thought I'd bring this up here so we can have a chat about it.
> > >
> > > If you had a group of maintainers, and it was obvious that this lis
> > could be one
> > > person, or several, then you would feel like you could join it if
> > > you
> > wanted to.
> > > It would feel like a team effort. A loose organisation of interested
> > parties.
> > >
> > > If there is a primary maintainer, then there is a feeling that this
> > piece of code
> > > is owned by somebody, and all you can do is perhaps assist that person.
> > Or
> > > perhaps you need to clear everything with that person first? How
> > > does it work?
> > >
> > > (This is the reason Apache projects do not have "lead developers" or
> > BFDLs.
> > > It discourages participation, and fosters a subservient permission
> > culture
> > > where we want a do-ocracy. It's also the reason we don't put author
> > > names in source code file. We never want someone to look at
> > > something, with an idea to fix or improve it and think, "oh, I
> > > better not, this isn't
> > mine.")
> > >
> > > I took a peek through my email for additional context, and I found:
> > >
> > > On 2 April 2013 23:45, Animesh Chaturvedi
> > > <animesh.chaturvedi@citrix.com
> > >
> > >  wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Can I propose that whoever wants to contribute in fixing defects
> > > > for a specific module add their name as maintainer of  that module
> > > > in component maintainer list [1]? And we update how to contribute
> > > > wiki on
> > > this process .
> > > >
> > > > During 4.1  there are a large number of major issues that as
> > > > community we ended up not addressing and given that number of
> > > > unassigned issues is high % should we consider auto-assign based
> > > > on the maintainers list? This is still not optimal since
> > > > auto-assign will go to primary maintainer and secondary
> > > > maintainers still need to pull in defects but is better than one person
> triaging defects.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I understand the motivation behind this, but I believe the outcome
> > > of
> > that
> > > thread was a consensus that auto-assignment does not happen in any
> > > other Apache projects, and should not happen here either. (So no
> > > need for this "primary maintainer" column.)
> > >
> > > --
> > > NS
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --
> NS

Mime
View raw message