To bring the elephant in the room into the discussion: There are a huge number of patches from Cumulus that we've had real trouble getting integrated. I've heard rumors/been told that this is true from other groups as well(please feel free to speak up). I've personally seen Joakim's frustrations with getting his patches integrated.
I think any model we come up with needs to bear in mind that we need to get the backlog reduced to a reasonable level and to figure out a methodology that we can be a bit more agile(for lack of a better word) in moving forward. One model that comes to mind is to allow 'maintainers' to focus on one technology. BGP/OSPF/RIP/zebra/lib could be logical breakdowns of this. donald On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 9:45 AM, Paul Jakma <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, 6 Nov 2015, Daniel Walton wrote: > > I do not think quagga should abandon its current model, I think we just >> need a larger number of active maintainers. >> > > No disagreement, for certain aspects of "maintainers". :) > > In the early days, the number of people regularly active on Quagga was == > the maintainers. > > Do we make everyone and anyone regularly active on Quagga a 'maintainer'? > > If yes, does that scale? > > If no, we're back to having one privileged group, versus the rest of the > community. > > regards, > -- > Paul Jakma [email protected] @pjakma Key ID: 64A2FF6A > Fortune: > -- Owen Meredith > > > _______________________________________________ > Quagga-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev >
_______________________________________________ Quagga-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev
