[boost] Git vs. SVN - select a review manager!

Subject: [boost] Git vs. SVN - select a review manager!
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-31 12:23:16

Vladimir Prus wrote:
> As of recent, we had quite a lot of discussion about process. In true
> open-source spirit, it was a fairly open discussion, with everybody
> offering their perspectives and experience. However, while we surely
> learned many things, it does not seem like we're going anywhere.
>
> For a quick experiment, I tried to assess whether the discussion
> actually reflects the needs of Boost developers, so I created a table
> of Boost developers sorted by the number of commits in 2010. It is
> here:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/5suwfbn
>
> It seems that 5 top Boost comitters did not participate much in recent
> discussions. And going down the list, it seems like many of active
> developers did not say anything, while most of discussions is fueled
> by folks who
> don't commit much.
>
> Of course, everybody can offer valuable thoughts, but if the goal is
> to fix things for Boost developers, it would make sense if developers
> say that needs fixing, as opposed to other people doing it for them.
>
> Maybe I suggest that for some time, we outright ban freeform
> discussion about process, and instead, we restrict them to threads
> started by a Boost developers and saying this: "I am maintainer of X,
> and had N commits and M trac changes in the last year. I most hate
> P1, P2 and P3. I would propose that we use T1, T2, and T3 to fix
> that". Then, everybody could join to suggest better
> way of fixing P1, P2 and P3 -- without making up other supposed
> problems.
>
> Thoughts?

I thought about this some more.  I understand your point.  Thinking about
this maybe there is something we CAN do.  We currently have
a review process with review manager, etc. ....  This has worked
quite well for accepting libraries.  The review manager's job is
to lend some structure to the discussion, try to forge a concensus. weigh 
all the input
(not necessarily equally), and arrive at a decision.  I suggest that
we engage in the same process structure for making a very
large tool change.

Robert Ramey