+1 for shepherd I would prefer using that term rather than maintainer. It is being used in Incubator PMC to help them keeping healthy development in podlings.
The term "maintainer" kind of being scrutinized in ASF communities, in recent episodes happening in Spark community. - Henry On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote: > I like the name "shepherd". It implies a non-authorative role, and implies > guidance, which is very fitting. > > I also thing there is no problem with having a "component shepherd" and a > "pull request shepherd". > > Stephan > > > On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 7:11 PM, Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I think calling the role maintainer is not a good idea. > > The Spark community had a maintainer process which they just voted to > > remove. From my understanding, a maintainer in Spark had a more active > role > > than the role we are currently discussing. > > > > I would prefer to not call the role "maintainer" to make clear that the > > responsibilities are different (less active) and mainly observing. > > > > 2016-06-01 13:14 GMT+02:00 Ufuk Celebi <u...@apache.org>: > > > > > Thanks! I like the idea of renaming it. I'm fine with shepherd and I > > > also like Vasia's suggestion "champion". > > > > > > I would like to add "Distributed checkpoints" as a separate component > > > to track development for check- and savepoints. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org > > > > > wrote: > > > > Btw, in Jira, if we clean up our components we can also set a > component > > > > Lead that would get notified of issues for that component. > > > > > > > > On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 at 10:43 Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> I'd also go with maintainer. > > > >> > > > >> On 01.06.2016 10:32, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > > > >> > Hi, > > > >> > I think maintainer is also fine if we clearly specify that they > are > > > not > > > >> > meant as dictators or gatekeepers of the component that they are > > > >> > responsible for. > > > >> > > > > >> > -Aljoscha > > > >> > > > > >> > On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 at 09:48 Vasiliki Kalavri < > > > vasilikikala...@gmail.com> > > > >> > wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> >> Hi, > > > >> >> > > > >> >> we could go for something like "sponsor" or "champion" :) > > > >> >> I'm fine with the proposal. Good to see more than 1 person for > both > > > >> Gelly > > > >> >> and Table API. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> cheers, > > > >> >> -V. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> On 1 June 2016 at 05:46, Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai <tzuli...@gmail.com > > > > > >> wrote: > > > >> >> > > > >> >>> I'd like to be added to the Streaming Connectors component > > (already > > > >> >> edited > > > >> >>> Wiki) :) > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> Ah, naming, one of the hardest problems in programming :P Some > > > >> comments: > > > >> >>> I agree with Robert that the name "maintainers" will be somewhat > > > >> >> misleading > > > >> >>> regarding the authoritative difference with committers / PMCs, > > > >> especially > > > >> >>> for future newcomers to the community who don't come across the > > > >> original > > > >> >>> discussion on this thread. > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> Simone's suggestion of Overseer seems good. The name naturally > > > matches > > > >> >> its > > > >> >>> role - > > > >> >>> - A group of "Overseers" for components, who keeps an eye on > > related > > > >> mail > > > >> >>> threads, known limitations and issues, JIRAs, open PRs, > requested > > > >> >> features, > > > >> >>> and potential new overseers and committers, etc, for the > component > > > >> >>> (original > > > >> >>> maintainer role). > > > >> >>> - A "Shepherd" for individual PRs, assigned from the overseers > of > > > the > > > >> >>> component with the aim to guide the submitting contributor. > > > Overseers > > > >> >>> typically pick up new PRs to shepherd themselves, or the leading > > > >> overseer > > > >> >>> allocates an overseer to shepherd a PR which hasn't been picked > up > > > yet > > > >> >>> after > > > >> >>> a certain period of time. > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> Or perhaps we can also simply go for "Shepherds" for components > > and > > > >> >>> "Assigned Shepherd" for individual PRs? > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> -- > > > >> >>> View this message in context: > > > >> >>> > > > >> >> > > > >> > > > > > > http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Structure-the-Flink-Open-Source-Development-tp11598p11932.html > > > >> >>> Sent from the Apache Flink Mailing List archive. mailing list > > > archive > > > >> at > > > >> >>> Nabble.com. > > > >> >>> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >
