Subject: Re: [boost] [Guild] Getting volunteers' changes back to trunk
From: Rene Rivera (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-11-12 14:52:35
On 11/12/2010 1:11 PM, Jim Bell wrote:
> On 1:59 PM, Rene Rivera wrote:
>>> I didn't see them. Repost?
>> Here's the post
> Thanks for reviving this. Sorry I glossed over it, too. Hope you don't
> mind if I respond generally.
> There's no way I'd lead an effort like that (without hourly
> compensation). Not a chance. Tracking all that criteria across all those
> people sounds like a huge ongoing time commitment.
I think most of the work of keeping track of those counts can be done
automatically by Trac.
> I see the guild as a large pool of volunteers who we call on (for a
> little help from each). All help is geared toward streamlining things
> for those more committed.
> Instead of all the criteria, I say throw it wide open. See who shows up,
> and what they accomplish. Let the cream rise to the top. (Again, you're
> not granting SVN access.) Having a big pool of volunteers you can call
> on to grind out the things many people can do seems very valuable.
The problem I see is that funneling through a small pipeline of
maintainers that do the commits doesn't solve the problem of getting
patches applied. It just prolongs the current bottlenecks to a different
set of people. And I would hate to be one of those people given the
likely huge workload in doing the commits. The most likely outcome of
such a structure would be either: patches slowing to a crawl like now as
maintainers don't have the time, or all patches get accepted as
maintainers are overwhelmed and avoid doing full reviews. Neither of
which is a desired outcome.
-- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk