On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 12:24:37PM -0500, David Robinson wrote:
> So the new third category are people willing to do all the
> grunt work of builds and tests that consumes all the time.
> This is the same thing we expect out of any Solaris
> developer so potentially the pool is anyone who has
> successfully done just one putback.
> Then the sponsor plays more of the role that is more traditionally
> done by a CRT advocate, verifying they did everything
> necessary, repeat until satisfied.
> If I have this right, this seems very reasonable.

  Since it seems to have been lost, I'll repeat my comment from

> Dan Price said:
> > I don't agree with this structure, then.  I think that at a minimum,
> > one should be considered a trained, qualified, and active contributor to
> > the release in question.
>   I agree (with Dan).  This plan seems focused on the gate and to a
>   lesser extent the tier-3 engineer, and pays little attention to the
>   needs of the original contributor.  If someone is "unable or
>   unwilling to mentor" someone internally, I don't see how or why they
>   should take on a role where they're effectively mentoring someone
>   outside of Sun -- someone who has no exposure to how Sun works
>   internally and is 100% dependent on their sponsor for guidance.
>   As a means of growing the experience of our more junior employees, it
>   seems like a pretty poor diet.  There is more to becoming a good
>   engineer than learning the process surrounding putback, and there's a
>   huge difference between shepherding pre-made fixes and generating
>   your own.  I think the overhead spent on a tier-3 engineer would be
>   better spent getting them to the tier-2 position based on their own
>   work -- better for both the engineers and the contributors.

  My point is that whatever process we put in place needs to do a lot
  more than just ensure that what gets put back works.  The proposed
  structure does only that.

  Regardless of whether they have a "tier-2" or "tier-1" partner, a
  sponsor is the primary source of information for an external
  contributor.  It is difficult to unlearn bad habits, and someone who
  doesn't qualify as a "tier-2" sponsor doesn't sound like they would
  have -- much less be able to teach -- the good habits a new
  contributor needs to learn.  I don't think putting inexperienced
  people on the front line is fair to the contributor, and I don't
  think its good for OpenSolaris in the long term.

  To look at this from another perspective, an engineer meeting only
  the minimum requirements for "tier-3" probably knows less about
  putting back than our more prolific external contributors.


Reply via email to