@Stephan:
Although I tried to raise some issues about splitting committers, I'm
still strongly in favor of some kind of restructuring. We just have to
be conscious about the disadvantages.
Not splitting the committers could leave the libraries in the same
stalling status, described by Till. Of course, dedicating current
committers as shepherds of the libraries could easily resolve the issue.
But that requires time from current committers. It seems like trade-offs
between code quality, speed of development, and committer efforts.
From what I see in the discussion about ML, there are many people
willing to contribute as well as production use-cases. This means we
could and should move forward. However, the development speed is
significantly slowed down by stalling PRs. The proposal for contributors
helping the review process did not really work out so far. In my
opinion, either code quality (by more easily accepting new committers)
or some committer time (reviewing/merging) should be sacrificed to move
forward. As Till has indicated, it would be shameful if we let this
contribution effort die.
Cheers,
Gabor
