[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases



On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Jeff Spaleta wrote:

A big +1 to everything Jeff says here.

--g

On Jan 8, 2008 12:53 PM, David Woodhouse <dwmw2 infradead org> wrote:
Perhaps one option would be for non-programmer packagers to team up with
a programmer/sponsor to take on the task of package maintenance? Where
currently a package has one 'owner', there would instead be two rĂ´les --
a 'packager' and potentially a separate 'hacker'. Those wanting to
package software which they can't fully maintain for themselves would
have to recruit a programmer-type to sign up for the job with them.

Here's how I would like to see things go.  I want to see SIGs as teams
with somewhat defined roles. We define these roles projectwide, but
each SIG as a team figure out who fills what role.  Obviously you
can't define all work in terms of roles. Some work will be
specialized. Thats OKAY.

But what the projectwide defined roles gives us, is a way to train up
new contributors in a way so that we aren't burdening each SIG with
the responsibility of training people to do the same common tasks.

So what sort of roles would a typical SIG probably have.  Off the cuff I'd say:
developers    (ie codemonkeys)
maintainers   (ie packagemonkeys)
triagers         (ie bugmonkeys)
documenters (ie textmonkeys)
artists           (ie mediamonkeys)

So SIG A's triagers are basically doing the same stuff that SIG B's
triagers do.  As a group all the triagers across all SIGs are building
their own tools and processes to help each other out. But they focus
their individual efforts on a particular SIGs piece of the bugzilla
pie.

Same thing with maintainers.... as a group maintainers affiliated
across all SIGs would be doing the same sort of crap day in and day
out. But the focus their attention on a SIG's scope of packages.

And so on and so on.

But what is really great about having defined roles at the project
level.. is that we can attempt to organize projectwide training for a
particular role.  We can attempt to organize projectwide recruitment
for a particular role.  Once we recruit and do basic training for a
role, projectwide, then we can plug those newly trained people into a
particular SIG that has a role that needs filling without burdening
the other experts in the SIG with the text of training for a role they
aren't performing.  What a SIG can then focus on is integrating that
person's role based skills into that particular SIGs development
culture.

Personally I want to get to the point where we can essentially have a
role training effort every quarter or so.  One quarter we make a
project wide push for triagers.. the next maybe its maintainers.. and
so on and so on... then we repeat.  But for this to work we need to
empower SIGs to be the team model and take responsibility for well
defined chunks of the software repository.

-jef

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board redhat com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board


--
Greg DeKoenigsberg
Community Development Manager
Red Hat, Inc. :: 1-919-754-4255
"To whomsoever much hath been given...
...from him much shall be asked"

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]