Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] What I Have In Mind

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Jeremy Blosser <jblosser-smgl AT firinn.org>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] What I Have In Mind
  • Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 01:44:17 -0600

I'll try to keep this talk on this thread. Leads, you should read it, the
rest of you can probably safely ignore it if you don't go for this kind of
stuff.

On Jan 20, Jeremy Blosser [jblosser-smgl AT firinn.org] wrote:
> a) As I mentioned before, I will be setting up regular meetings pretty
> ...
> I am tentatively planning to do these every 3 months for now, on the
> 3rd or 4th weekend of the month. Probably Feb/May/Aug/Nov. If they
> start out well and we want more we can look at that, but this would
> be the minimum. Look for more info later.

Let's call it the third weekend of those months. Feb 17/18, May 19/20, Aug
18/19, Nov 17/18. Are there preferences between Saturday or Sunday and
time of day? I want to use the same day/time for each meeting so there's
no question of what to expect. First priority will be a time all Leads can
attend but other developer preferences will provide the tie breaker if
needed.

> To this end I'll be requiring the Component Leads to give me details
> on who they want making decisions for them when they are away,
> whether assistants or the full Lead group or just me. We *will* stop
> being frozen by one person moving or losing connectivity or getting a
> new job or being abducted by aliens or otherwise getting busy with
> life.

Component Leads, please let me know *before* your next absence what you
want us to do when you're away and something needs to happen before you get
back. I know in theory we usually assume the PL will just do what needs to
be done, but I prefer to only do that if it's what you want, and will
respect your wishes otherwise. However I'm not going to let us do nothing,
so if you *don't* let us know what you want, the default will be for me to
do what I think needs done. If the others don't like what I pick they can
of course ask for a vote on it, same as always.

The primary cases I know of where this comes up are a) developers asking
for access to your section, b) regular releases falling behind, and c)
emergency release required (security problem, rm -rf / discovered, etc.).
Possible fallback plans from you for each of these (and anything else that
comes up) might include a) waiting at least <x> days for you to respond,
depending on severity, b) naming one or more Assistants, c) PL taking
action, d) asking us to take an Issue Vote, e) any other plans you come up
with. I'll do my best to do whatever you ask, as long as it's a plan. But
I imagine you'll be accountable to the others on your next Component Lead
vote for the reasonableness of your requests. :-)

> For my part I will probably be appointing multiple APLs with
> different focuses; like I said, I prefer to delegate things, and we
> don't have enough people to afford a real hierarchy.

I'll name Assistants before or at the first meeting. Until then if I'm not
here when something needs deciding, I'll say consensus of the Component
Leads and/or a regular Issue Vote is good enough to act without me. It's
not like I do any of the real work anyway. :-)

> Fair warning to those of you who haven't gotten around to git yet: We
> do have a policy that says devs who go 6 months without contributing
> get slated for removal automatically, and I'll be enforcing that
> starting in February. You probably want to either make sure you're
> contributing or hope your fellow devs will vote to keep you
> regardless.

I plan to do this as a block vote after the current Cauldron vote and
before the Grimoire vote in March.

Attachment: pgpMN_3C1cVpF.pgp
Description: PGP signature




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page