Open Stack

Joe Gordon wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Dean Troyer <dtroyer at gmail.com
> <mailto:dtroyer at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>     On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 5:30 PM, Joe Gordon <joe.gordon0 at gmail.com
>     <mailto:joe.gordon0 at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>         Do you feel like a core deveper/reviewer (we initially called
>         them core developers) [1]:
> 
>             In OpenStack a core developer is a developer who has
>             submitted enough high quality code and done enough code
>             reviews that we trust their code reviews for merging into
>             the base source tree. It is important that we have a process
>             for active developers to be added to the core developer team.
> 
>         Or a maintainer [1]:
> 
>             1. They share responsibility in the project’s success.
>             2. They have made a long-term, recurring time investment to
>             improve the project.
>             3. They spend that time doing whatever needs to be done, not
>             necessarily what is the most interesting or fun.
> 
>     First, I don't think these two things are mutually exclusive, that's
>     a false dichotomy.  They sound like two groups of attributes (or
>     roles), both of which must be earned in the eyes of the rest of the
>     project team.  Frankly, being a PTL is your maintainer list on
>     steroids for some projects, except that the PTL is directly elected.

+1000

> Yes, these are not orthogonal ideas. The question should be rephrased to
> 'which description do you identify the most with: core
> developer/reviewer or maintainer?'

- Some people are core reviewers and maintainers (or "drivers", to reuse
the openstack terminology we already have for that)
- Some people are core reviewers only (because they can't commit 90% of
their work time to work on project priorities)
- Some people are maintainers/drivers only (because their project duties
don't give them enough time to also do reviewing)
- Some people are casual developers / reviewers (because they can't
spend more than 30% of their day on project stuff)

All those people are valuable. Simply renaming "core reviewers" to
"maintainers" (creating a single super-developer class) just excludes
valuable people.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)