David Grove writes:
> I'm wondering how different this is from the current setup.
Currently there's the pumpking and the pumpking decides when to
release a new version of Perl. This exposes the pumpking to all sorts
of allegations, and potentially exposes Perl to being bought out.
When no single person can force a release through, both problems go
away. It's distributing the current pumpking's responsibility
(integrating patches, quality control, communication and deadlines)
to more people. This has the added benefit of hopefully avoiding
pumpking burnout.
> Points of clarification, however. QA team determines definite
> preparedness for release?
It's a joint decision. If QA likes it, but the code person doesn't,
they have to sort that out between themselves before the release can
happen. If the user liaison says "we've been promising this for the
last three releases, we can't make another release without it" then
the others have to listen.
But nothing can be released without QA's approval.
Nat
