who is on point?

[Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com>]

People community suggestion.

I would like to suggest that for efficiency, and so that someone new 
joining the project
knows their patches will be looked at that when we get a new individual 
providing
patches that we assign a point Qpid committer to the new patch provider 
after they have
provided a few patches.

We have basically being doing this in process - but it might be good to 
officially do this. It
has a few benefits:

1.) That the patch provider knows that his patches are being picked up 
by someone.
2.) Prevents - Everyone does not pick up the same patches
3.) Prevents - Everyone thinks that someone else has picked up the patch.

I don't believe we have dropped a patch yet - but we are getting big 
enough as a project
that it might be worth considering.

Thoughts..
Carl.

Re: who is on point?

[Suran Jayathilaka <su...@wso2.com>]

This sounds like a great approach.
+1.

Might I also suggest tagging some of the simpler (read easy to pick up 
and fix) issues as such? Maybe tag them as "Newcomer" or "Beginner" 
issues? This kind of approach I have seen with Apache Derby issues and 
was quite helpful.

Thanks.
Suran

Carl Trieloff wrote:
>
> People community suggestion.
>
> I would like to suggest that for efficiency, and so that someone new 
> joining the project
> knows their patches will be looked at that when we get a new 
> individual providing
> patches that we assign a point Qpid committer to the new patch 
> provider after they have
> provided a few patches.
>
> We have basically being doing this in process - but it might be good 
> to officially do this. It
> has a few benefits:
>
> 1.) That the patch provider knows that his patches are being picked up 
> by someone.
> 2.) Prevents - Everyone does not pick up the same patches
> 3.) Prevents - Everyone thinks that someone else has picked up the patch.
>
> I don't believe we have dropped a patch yet - but we are getting big 
> enough as a project
> that it might be worth considering.
>
> Thoughts..
> Carl.
>
>
>

Re: who is on point?

[Rajith Attapattu <ra...@gmail.com>]

Carl,

I am happy to continue helping Senaka.
I can commit the documentaiton patches directly, but for any c++ patches I
will follow up with Alan/Gordon etc.

Regards,

Rajith

On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 8:58 PM, Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com>
wrote:

>
> People community suggestion.
>
> I would like to suggest that for efficiency, and so that someone new
> joining the project
> knows their patches will be looked at that when we get a new individual
> providing
> patches that we assign a point Qpid committer to the new patch provider
> after they have
> provided a few patches.
>
> We have basically being doing this in process - but it might be good to
> officially do this. It
> has a few benefits:
>
> 1.) That the patch provider knows that his patches are being picked up by
> someone.
> 2.) Prevents - Everyone does not pick up the same patches
> 3.) Prevents - Everyone thinks that someone else has picked up the patch.
>
> I don't believe we have dropped a patch yet - but we are getting big
> enough as a project
> that it might be worth considering.
>
> Thoughts..
> Carl.
>
>
>


-- 
Regards,

Rajith Attapattu
Red Hat
http://rajith.2rlabs.com/

Re: who is on point?

[Alan Conway <ac...@redhat.com>]

Carl Trieloff wrote:
> 
> People community suggestion.
> 
> I would like to suggest that for efficiency, and so that someone new 
> joining the project
> knows their patches will be looked at that when we get a new individual 
> providing
> patches that we assign a point Qpid committer to the new patch provider 
> after they have
> provided a few patches.
> 
> We have basically being doing this in process - but it might be good to 
> officially do this. It
> has a few benefits:
> 
> 1.) That the patch provider knows that his patches are being picked up 
> by someone.
> 2.) Prevents - Everyone does not pick up the same patches
> 3.) Prevents - Everyone thinks that someone else has picked up the patch.
> 
> I don't believe we have dropped a patch yet - but we are getting big 
> enough as a project
> that it might be worth considering.
> 
> Thoughts..
> Carl.
> 
> 

+1.