On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 11:28 PM, David <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 05/27/2010 02:16 PM, Charles R Harris wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 11:06 PM, Anne Archibald
> > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >
> >     On 27 May 2010 01:55, Matthew Brett <[email protected]
> >     <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >      > Hi,
> >      >
> >      >> Linux has Linus, ipython has Fernando, nipy has... well, I'm
> >     sure it is
> >      >> somebody. Numpy and Scipy no longer have a central figure and I
> >     like it that
> >      >> way. There is no reason that DVCS has to inevitably lead to a
> >     central
> >      >> authority.
> >      >
> >      > I think I was trying to say that the way it looks as if it will be
> -
> >      > before you try it - is very different from the way it actually is
> >     when
> >      > you get there.   Anne put the idea very well - but I still think
> >     it is
> >      > very hard to understand, without trying it, just how liberating
> the
> >      > workflow is from anxieties about central authorities and so on.
> >       You
> >      > can just get on with what you want to do, talk with or merge from
> >      > whoever you want, and the whole development process becomes much
> more
> >      > fluid and productive.   And I know that sounds chaotic but - it
> just
> >      > works.  Really really well.
> >
> >     One way to think of it is that there is no "main line" of
> development.
> >     The only time the central repository needs to pull from the others is
> >     when a release is being prepared. As it stands we do have a single
> >     release manager, though it's not necessarily the same for each
> >     version. So if we wanted, they could just go and pull and merge the
> >     repositories of everyone who's made a useful change, then release the
> >     results. Of course, this will be vastly easier if all those other
> >     people have already merged each other's results (into different
> >     branches if appropriate). But just like now, it's the release
> >     manager's decision which changes end up in the next version.
> >
> >
> > No, at this point we don't have a release manager, we haven't since 1.2.
> > We have people who do the builds and put them up on sourceforge, but
> > they aren't release managers, they don't decide what is in the release
> > or organise the effort. We haven't had a central figure since Travis got
> > a real job ;) And now David has a real job too. I'm just pointing out
> > that that projects like Linux and IPython have central figures because
> > the originators are still active in the development. Let me put it this
> > way, right now, who would you choose to pull the changes and release the
> > official version?
>
> Ralf is the release manager, and for deciding what goes into the
> release, we do just as we do now. For small changes which do not warrant
> discussion, they would be handled through pull requests in github at
> first, but we can improve after that (for example having an automatic
> gatekeeper which only pulls something that would at least compile and
> pass the test on a linux machine).
>
>
So you are saying that Ralf has to manage all the pull requests? Have you
asked Ralf about that? An automatic gatekeeper is pretty much a central
repository, as I was suggesting.

Chuck
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

Reply via email to