On Thursday, 9 May 2013 at 21:10:55 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
4) Reviewers' roles and responsibilities. I am not defining
how a reviewer gets assigned, not sure how that should work,
and it likely depends on the tool we use.
I think each Phobos module should have an official maintainer.
The modules' documentation have "Author" sections, but those
typically list everyone that have ever made a significant
contribution to a module, and many of those people have long
since withdrawn from the D community.
I propose that there be additional "Maintainer" sections which,
for each module, specify *one* person who has the primary
responsibility for that module. If and when that person
disappears from the D community, she or he must be replaced by
someone else.
Whenever someone makes a pull request, it should be assigned to
the maintainer for the module which is most affected by the
request. That person also has the primary review responsibility
for the request, in the manner described by Steve, but may of
course reassign it to someone else if necessary or appropriate.
For example, I would be happy to be the official maintainer of
std.complex, std.path and std.process. I feel a certain
ownership towards those modules, and I very much want to review
changes made to them. Unfortunately, time currently does not
permit me to scan the forums, Github and Bugzilla every day for
discussions, pull requests and bug reports pertaining to these
modules. If, however, someone would assign them to me, I would
be automatically notified via e-mail, and then I would definitely
take the time to deal with it.
There will of course be requests that have a large impact on
several modules, and there should also be someone that takes care
of coordinating the reviews of these.
Lars
