On 1:59 PM, David Abrahams wrote:
First things first: I want to call this program "Boost.Guild." Agreed?
Agreed. (I like it!)
At Sat, 06 Nov 2010 08:55:31 -0500, Jim Bell wrote:
Say you have a team of volunteers attacking failed regressions and tickets. They're creating (hopefully) good trunk patches. They can't commit to the trunk, but can modify tickets.
If maintainers are active, they could review and incorporate them. But this increased activity may be more of a strain for them. If maintainers are MIA, it won't happen.
So we need at least one person to bring these changes back into the trunk. Changes to libraries they're not familiar with. BoostPro is willing to commit resources to help with that if there's someone else (like you) running the program with us.
I envision it to be self-study and group-study. What do you see my role being? (Besides keeping an e-mail list of members and organizing the lavish annual appreciation banquet. ;-)
We'll need a list of libraries whose maintainers authorize such changes, and libraries whose maintainers want to control all changes themselves.
Agreed. I envision active maintainers establishing rapport with guild members whose work they liked.
What's the best way for the volunteers to signal to these trunk-authority people to pick up their change?
A Ticket keyword and corresponding report should work. Is there a better way? I can't think of one.
Should we look for a person or two from the volunteers for this role? I don't think the volunteers themselves can be authorized to commit to trunk. We need more trusted people to do that.
I agree. One trusted person should sanity-check marked changes and merge. (And revert!) And a single person would be good in terms of getting to know guild members whose work needs closer scrutiny. (And they could ask other guild members to help with that scrutiny.) But could this alone be a significant effort?
A regular schedule (say, twice a week) to run the report and patch would be good, I think. Trunk regressions need time to bake. Sorry, which report?
A Trac ticket keyword query showing the trunk patches that guild members suggest. In fact, we could build a sophisticated guild workflow using trac ticket keywords alone. I haven't decided if that's crazy or brilliant. Should there be a guild mailing list?