On 11/14/2010 8:39 AM, Jim Bell wrote:
On 1:59 PM, Robert Ramey wrote:
David Abrahams wrote:
In a larger library, many patches and fixes will inadvertantly break something else.
Absolutely. To that end, a diff of every test matrix with the previous one, in some form, would be very useful.
I'm working on a solution to that.. By replacing the whole test report system. But it's something that's going to take a few months to make it work :-(
If changes go in from more than one person - then no one is responsable.
It seems to me that the real problem here is that some libraries are not being maintained well enough. I realize that this is not easy to fix, but you won't make [up] for the lack of a person willing to be responsable for a library by spreading the authority among another group of people.
I disagree. If a person signs onto a ticket, (s)he takes responsibility for that ticket for its life, so (s)he'd get pulled into working out things cascading from that ticket.
Right.. Also I think having such a Guild will eventually solve the problem of "some" libraries not being maintained. Eventually Guild members will become experts at maintaining particular libraries and could eventually take full ownership of abandoned libraries much better than having some random person volunteer, as we do now. Having a fluid Guild work on bugs has the most benefit as far as balancing control. If a libraries is well maintained, like yours Robert, then it's unlikely that a Guild member will ever need to get involved. After all there's no point in trying to fix bugs that will be taken care of by the owner and expert diligently. Hence, for libraries that are not well maintained will get more attention and the author will loose more control by the sheer fact that she is less diligent. -- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail