Re: [Gluster-users] [FEEDBACK] Governance of GlusterFS project

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

 



Harshavardhana <harsha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> What is good for GlusterFS as a whole is highly debatable - since there
> are no module owners/subsystem maintainers as of yet at-least on paper.

Just my two cents on that: you need to make clear if a module maintainer
is a dictator or a steward for the module: does he has the last word on
anything touching his module, or is there some higher instance to settle
discussions that do not reach consensus?

IMO the first approach creates two problems:

- having just one responsible person for a module is a huge bet that
this person will have good judgments. Be careful to let a maintainer
position open instead of assigning it to the wrong person.

- having many different dictators each ruling over a module can create
difficult situations when a proposed change impacts many modules. 

-- 
Emmanuel Dreyfus
http://hcpnet.free.fr/pubz
manu@xxxxxxxxxx



[Index of Archives]     [Gluster Users]     [Ceph Users]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux