Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] Separate "developer" list for admins?

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: flux <flux AT sourcemage.org>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] Separate "developer" list for admins?
  • Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 07:30:38 +0900

Eric Sandall (eric AT sandall.us) wrote [10.04.07 07:26]:
> This brings up the questions of do we want the admins to be part of
> our project (I'm for yes) and do the admins want to be considered as
> part of this project?
>
> Perhaps if we replace "Developer" with "Member" in our current
> terminology and add sub-groups of "Admin" and "Developer" (for now,
> with possible future roles as needed) where "Developer" has the added
> onus of a commit quota.

I'm OK with this, as long as everyone else is. It does restrict the
admins in terms of who they can have as assistant/backup admins though.
As long as there's no shortage of admins with interest in the project
that won't be a problem, of course.

--
Justin "flux_control" Boffemmyer
Cauldron wizard and general mage
Source Mage GNU/Linux
http://www.sourcemage.org

Attachment: pgpFpjRvVVFVK.pgp
Description: PGP signature




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page