My preferred path would be:
1. attempt automation (have human sheriff/wranglers while this is done)
2. see what cannot be automated
3. see if we can make up for that lack via a change in community
behaviors/priorities
4. if 3 fails, have called out role (rotating or otherwise)
On Dec 7, 2005, at 8:42 PM, Katie Capps Parlante wrote:
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
My take, then, is that we need not a rotating "build sheriff" but
a rotating "tinderbox wrangler". The difference being that the
former is expected to enforce rules, and the latter is a co-
ordinator for various technical issues and a temporary replacement
for better monitoring tools in certain areas. I don't mind being
a tinderbox wrangler, but I really don't want to be a sheriff.
My 2c...
-1 to having a daily "rotating sheriff"
* negotiating the role day by day seems pretty painful
* I also prefer the connotation of someone helping identify and
resolve technical issues over rules enforcement
+1 to periodically handing off the role of "tinderbox wrangler"
periodically to people willing to take on the role
* week at a time? month at a time?
* I'll add myself to the list of volunteers
If others prefer a daily rotation, I'd play along. :)
Cheers,
Katie
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
----
Ted Leung Open Source Applications Foundation (OSAF)
PGP Fingerprint: 1003 7870 251F FA71 A59A CEE3 BEBA 2B87 F5FC 4B42
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
