Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: November 2001:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Documentation, Usability and Development

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Documentation, Usability and Development

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: Gregory Berkolaiko <gberkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: Documentation, Usability and Development
From: Petr Baudis <pasky@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 13:01:16 +0100

> > > As I recall, everyone (or at least everyone who expressed an opinion,
> > > which may or may not have included the maintainers) was in favor of a
> > > more open development model.  I believe the idea was to recruit a few
> > > more maintainers - but this never happened (AFAIK).
> > 
> > we certainly do need another maintainer or two, and with the admonition
> > that one may not apply his own patch.
Lalala, everyone is saying this, Raimar is calling for this (minimally for
about two months, IIRC), but noone actually volunteers.

> We can also introduce a subclass "reviewer" with no writing priveleges but
> with more ability to influence things.  Like if a reviewer (or two) say the
> patch is good, then the responsible maintainer either has to include it or
> specify why not -- within a reasonable amount of time (say a week).
Sounds to me like useless bureaucracy. What would be a reason for doing this?
The reviewer should be certainly wise person with good knowledge of code...
wait, why he shouldn't be maintainer too, then?


                                Petr "Pasky" Baudis

UN*X programmer, UN*X administrator, hobbies = IPv6, IRC, FreeCiv hacking
  "A common mistake that people make, when trying to design
   something completely foolproof is to underestimate the
   ingenuity of complete fools."
     -- Douglas Adams in Mostly Harmless
Public PGP key, geekcode and stuff:

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]