| 1 |
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 4:58 AM, Jeroen Roovers <jer@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Right now, CC'ing a single alias is inconvenient, but under your |
| 4 |
> proposal, you might need to CC a dozen or more people instead of that |
| 5 |
> alias. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
That is incorrect. Herds would be replaced with projects, not with |
| 9 |
lists of individual (non-)maintainers. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I don't think that anybody thinks that having groups of devs isn't |
| 12 |
useful. The problem is that we have two different mechanisms for |
| 13 |
having groups of people, and one of them seems to make more sense than |
| 14 |
the other. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Answer this: 5 developers want to maintain a group of packages |
| 17 |
together. Should they form a herd, or a project? Under what |
| 18 |
circumstances should they choose one vs the other? |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
I don't think the distinction is particularly useful, and projects at |
| 21 |
least have a straightforward governance model. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
Rich |
Archives