On 06/10/2015 12:10 PM, Krishnan Parthasarathi wrote:
Hi,
Can you please merge the following patches:
http://review.gluster.org/#/c/11087/
Avra,
I think you should maintain the snapshot scheduler feature
and shouldn't depend on me as a glusterd maintainer, for
merging changes. I am not really maintaining snapshot scheduler
in any sense of the word, so I should not be merging patches too :)
Vijay,
Is it too late to add Avra to the list of proposed maintainers? Avra
has also worked extensively in glusterd for geo-replication, volume-snapshot
and volume-locks (core), mgmt-v3 transaction framework (core) etc. He is the
only one sending patches to snapshot-scheduler feature. I have been merging patches
since it is built on top of volume-snapshot, which I think I shouldn't be.
Thoughts?
I would expect the snapshot-scheduler feature to be maintained by the
proposed snapshot maintainer for now.
I am also not a major fan of a single component being managed by
multiple folks. Given that respective component maintainers will be
managing their parts of glusterd & CLI going forward, I think we are
positioned reasonably well to manage patches in glusterd.
A sustainable model of managing patches in any upstream project does
involve reviews happening from both maintainers and non-maintainers. As
maintainers, we need to encourage additional code reviews from subject
matter experts to prevent us from being bottlenecks in the review
process. Those of us who involve ourselves more in reviews and all
aspects of community engagement will be natural candidates to be
maintainers subsequently.
Regards,
Vijay
_______________________________________________
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
