"Peter Dimov"
Alexander Lamaison wrote:
It's not the same thing as giving the whole world commit rights.
Yeah, I know. In Boost parlance though, "maintainer" does mean "commit rights", and therefore "community maintenance" does mean "giving the community commit rights".
I get that.
Even if the only thing you do is press the "Merge Pull Request" button from time to time, you're still the maintainer. That's not because only you can work on the code; it's because (a) if something goes wrong, it's your responsibility to fix it and (b) you're supposed to be familiar with the the decisions underlying the design of the library and the history behind them, and therefore can evaluate the merits of a proposed change and the risk of it breaking the world.
What part of that means only one person is qualified to make those decisions? The community maintenance idea just means that that responsibility is shared between members of a team. Each member of that team would still, individually, be expected to fix anything they break in the course of the maintenance, and to understand the design decisions sufficiently to make informed choices about the proposed changes. Alex -- Swish - Easy SFTP for Windows Explorer (http://www.swish-sftp.org)