Previously Jon Stahl wrote:
We were just chatting a bit here at ONE/Northwest global HQ and the following
idea came up...
Hanno pointed out to me a short while ago that a number of key core Plone
components don't really have strong, active owners. e.g. Wicked, Users +
Groups UI, etc.
-Original Message-
From: Wichert Akkerman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Wichert Akkerman
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 12:03 AM
To: Jon Stahl
Cc: framework-team@lists.plone.org
Subject: Re: [Framework-Team] random thought: identify the components
that
lack owners
Jon Stahl wrote:
I'm wondering why this would be a task for the framework team?
I'm open for suggestions about who else might take it on.
I'd say the general development community.
I think we have a bit of a problem in that we have no
formally-designated leadership team for the codebase of
Hi Jon.
Jon Stahl wrote:
However, there's really no definitive list of these that we can use to
recruit more talent.
I've just given you Trac admin rights, so you can have a look at
https://dev.plone.org/plone/admin/ticket/components which is probably
the best we have. I'm not quite sure what
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hanno Schlichting wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:
Hmm, as an outsider, the FWT's job (reviewing and accepting PLIPs) is to
do what a single BFDL would do in a project would have one.
It might seem so from a certain point of view. That's however not
On Sep 26, 2008, at 8:05 PM, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
I'd be very reluctant to make the framework team into a general code
leadership team, though. That's explicitly *not* what it has been
designed for and the way it is elected and the people are recruited
doesn't give them a lot of authority
Tres Seaver wrote:
It seems to me that not having continuity of architectural vision across
releases, including the ability to remove broken / abandoned components,
is a really dangerous place for Plone to be.
Is this an actual or a hypothetical problem?
I think there is architectural vision
