On 5/19/2012 2:01 AM, Thilo Six wrote:
Hello Ben,
Excerpt from Ben Fritz:
-- <snip> --
1. I want to maintain all changes to my file. Please don't touch it beyond
what I send you. I commit to be responsive enough for this to work.
2. I want to do all "big" changes and feature additions, but "small" changes
and bugfixes can be done by the team. I will maintain my files in a way
that changes will not be lost from the runtime repository.
3. I want to remain the official maintainer of the file, but the file belongs
to the Vim community. Do what you will with it, I'll submit changes like
any other contributor.
4. I do not wish to be the maintainer anymore. Please take it on as a group
effort or find someone else.
(usually a lurker, but for some reason process issues...)
The above "file maintenance levels", which imply maintainer
role/responsibility for a given file, seem about right and should
satisfy Dr. Chips' concerns. (procedural question: should the maintainer
level appear in the header of the file in question? And in general what
is in a file's header? Should header have a particular format so it can
be grep'd for stats/summaries)
In some ways, 3 and 4 are almost the same; they do feel different, but I
don't really see a functional difference. If all discussions of changes
(except possibly for level 1 maintainer) occurs in a public mailing
list, what duties/responsibilities does a level 3 role have compared to
level 4? Maybe there are only two roles, along with "no maintainer".
level 3 might be useful as a "file guru" for questions, especially if
the guru no longer subscribes to vim dev.
IMO, the following should be part of the procedural description of how
this new maintenance model works and not a file maintenance level.
5. We need to know who is an active member of the community. If you are still
interested in maintaining your files make sure that the email address that
is shiped with your files is up to date and functional.
If we do not hear from you within the next 3 months or the email we send
to you bounces we consider you to be MIA.
In that case we *regard your files to be without current maintainer* and
put them under the provsion of the vim community.
By other mail it looks like the big procedural issue of repository
hierarchy/operation is getting close to agreement. mercurial does have
an ACL extension, http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/AclExtension; but
that might be overkill and/or too much maintenance. I have no experience
with it, but I thought I'd bring it up.
--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
