[asterisk-dev] [policy] Bug Tracker Workflow Discussion

[Tzafrir Cohen]

On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 03:08:06PM -0500, Chris Tooley wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 2:54 PM, Russell Bryant <russell at digium.com> wrote:
> >
> > Johansson Olle E wrote:
> >> Here's the core. Russell has final veto, and who gave him that?
> >>
> >> Please observe that this is a procedure discussion, not a discussion
> >> about a person...
> >
> > I would say Kevin probably has the final final veto.  :)
> >
> > Anyway, there certainly hasn't been a procedure.  It's just been how
> > things have played out.  This was obviously Mark's project.  He passed
> > the torch to Kevin.  Since then, for a lot of the more day-to-day like
> > decisions, that torch has been passed to me.
> >
> > I'm always open for suggestions and discussion about policies and
> > whatever else that may help more effectively run this project.
> >
> As no one person has the ability to even come close to being an expert on
> the entire code base, I'd vote for the lieutenant model.  Not necessarily
> someone that "owns" a piece of code, but more likely someone that knows
> most about a particular group of applications, resources, channels, etc and
> can make informed decisions about direction and appropriateness of things
> that need committed, delayed or seriously reworked.  Maintainer is, to me,
> an ugly name for the task, it reeks of code-ownership, which is almost never
> a good thing.

Just as long as it doesn't create as many bottlenecks as the number of
lieutenants.

-- 
               Tzafrir Cohen
icq#16849755              jabber:tzafrir.cohen at xorcom.com
+972-50-7952406           mailto:tzafrir.cohen at xorcom.com
http://www.xorcom.com  iax:guest at local.xorcom.com/tzafrir