Hi
Am 2026-06-01 15:49, schrieb Ben Ramsey:
At least 4 messages raised concerns about the naming of the roles:
1. "I'm not sure I like the notion or language of 'hands-off' vs.
'hands-on' release managers." [1]
2. "I disagree with designating whether anyone is 'hands-on' or
'hands-off.'" [1]
3. "I still dislike the distinction of 'hands-on' and 'hands-off' as
descriptors for these roles and disagree with their use in defining
these roles." [2]
4. "If we can come up with better terminology around the roles [...]
then I'll probably change my vote to a 'yes.'" [2]
5. "I've been thinking more about the terminology and have come up with
a concrete suggestion." [3]
6. "I agree with Ben, I would prefer 'Veteran Release Manager' /
'Co-release Manager' over 'hands on' / 'hands off'. The 'hands off'
sounds negative to me." [4]
(1), (2), and (3) were concerns with regard to the policy itself, not
the terminology used. For (4) you elided the relevant part during,
namely “and make the roles less about their level of involvement”, which
is also a concern regarding the policy itself. And similarly the email
that contained quote (5) also mentions “I don't want to define the roles
around involvement”, which is a concern regarding the policy itself and
(6) is in direct agreement of that without adding anything by itself.
Best regards
Tim Düsterhus
