[Reviewers] Changing the name of "reviewers" group and repository

Pierre-Yves David pierre-yves.david at ens-lyon.org
Mon Mar 14 13:24:16 UTC 2016



On 03/10/2016 11:14 PM, Martin von Zweigbergk wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 2:54 PM Pierre-Yves David
> <pierre-yves.david at ens-lyon.org <mailto:pierre-yves.david at ens-lyon.org>>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>     On 03/10/2016 10:38 PM, Martin von Zweigbergk wrote:
>      > "pusher" makes sense, but note that it (informally) means "a
>     person who
>      > sells illegal drugs" (also reminds me of
>      > http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0117407/).
>
>     Gah, slang…
>
>      > Does it make sense to call us "maintainers"?
>
>     This is currently used for a smaller group. And It think it make sense
>     to keep the "ability to push draft patch", and "responsability to
>     maintain" Mercurial separated to put extra burden of people who get the
>     commit bits.
>
>     We currently have multiple groups:
>
>     "Matt":
>         contains: Matt Mackall
>         can: access to the publishing repository, can make release
>
>
> Will Matt retain this role? IIUC, some council (but not the one below?)
> would pick a person every week who would be the one publishing changes.
> (This question is probably unrelated to your question, but I'd still
> like to know.)

No, Matt is hoping to be able to stop being the single one in this role 
sometime this year.

 From what I understood from a conversation with Matt a couple of months 
ago is idea was:

- Get a steering committee up, to hold pretty much all decision power in 
the project. The number of 7 members was mentioned.

- Have this steering committee define some rule to give publish access 
to some contributors.

So as far as I understand/remember the next step is for Matt to work 
with the SFC to change the bylaw of Mercurial and define a steering 
committee. From there I think Matt want the steering committee to take 
care of the rest so he have an opinion but fuzzy planning as it will be 
the committee job to do these plan. I'm not sure what's the status of 
Matt/SFC discussion today.

Cheers,

-- 
Pierre-Yves David



More information about the Reviewers mailing list