Hi,

At the moment, all reviewers and maintainers have to be appointed by the
Steering Committee.  I wonder if we could add a second, more community-based
route: someone can be appointed as a reviewer or maintainer with the agreement
of a given number of people who already have an equal or greater remit.

It's already possible for reviewers or maintainers to defer to the
opinion of someone they trust and rubber-stamp that other person's
review or patch.  Having the ability to appoint the other person as a
co-reviewer or co-maintainer of that area is really just replacing
patch-by-patch trust with a more ongoing trust.

If that seems a bit woolly, and if a more formally defined process
seems necessary, then how about this strawman:

* Someone can be nominated to be a reviewer of an area by sending a
  private email to every reviewer and maintainer who covers a non-strict
  superset of that area.  The nomination is approved if it is supported
  by at least two such reviewers or maintainers and if there are no
  objections.  People would be given at least a week to respond.

* The process would be the same for maintainers, with the same set of
  addressees, except that there must already be at least one maintainer
  for that area and, in addition to the previous requirements, all such
  maintainers must be in favour.

  (So if the area is maintained by one person, the nomination would
  need the support of that maintainer and at least one reviewer of a
  wider area.  If the area is maintained by two of more people, they
  would all need to agree.)

The idea with making it private is that it allows for a more honest
discussion.  But the convention could be to have a public discussion
instead, if that seems better.

Like I say, this would just be a second, alternative route.  It would
still be possible to ask the SC instead.

In case it sounds otherwise, I'm really not trying to pick a fight here.
I just don't remember this being discussed on-list for a long time,
so it seemed worth bringing up.  (Maybe it has been discussed at the
Cauldron -- not sure.)

Thanks,
Richard

Reply via email to