www-infrastructure-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henning Schmiedehausen <...@intermeta.de>
Subject Re: [dSCM] Use case: infra down for maintenance
Date Fri, 02 May 2008 10:22:37 GMT

On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 15:36 -0700, Matthieu Riou wrote:

[...]

> > The difference is step 2.  In the former there is a single known place for
> > people to monitor.  In the latter, it adds complexity in the form of known
> > and unknown peers whose locations must be kept track of and disseminated.
> >  Given the nature of developers who are loathe to follow even the modicum of
> > procedure that we already impose I predict a proliferation of ad hoc peers
> > that are not on most people's radar.
> >
> 
> That's because we have an existing process in place and created a single
> known place for the patches (Jira). We could very well have a single known
> place in the latter case if so we choose.

Cool. Come up with a plan for us to review. How would you set this up?
(Please keep in mind: 2000+ committers, 60+ projects, growth of at least
10% per year).

	Best regards
		Henning


-- 
Henning P. Schmiedehausen  -- hps@intermeta.de | JEE, Linux, Unix
91054 Buckenhof, Germany   -- +49 9131 506540  | Apache Java Software
Open Source Consulting, Development, Design    | 

INTERMETA - Gesellschaft fuer Mehrwertdienste mbH - RG Fuerth, HRB 7350
Gesellschaftssitz: Buckenhof. Geschaeftsfuehrer: Henning Schmiedehausen

  char name_buf[257];           /* max unix filename is 256, right? */



Mime
View raw message