[Pulp-dev] Plugin teams problem statement

[David Davis]

Thanks for the feedback. I think I addressed all of it but let me know if I
missed something.


David

On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 11:38 AM, Michael Hrivnak <mhrivnak at redhat.com>
wrote:

> This looks good. I made a couple of small in-line suggestions by doing
> strike-through followed by a replacement. Broader suggestions follow:
>
> For me, I think the first point could be read as describing a logistical
> problem of giving someone a commit bit on a single repo. "you have to give
> that person committer rights to all plugins and Pulp core at once." Once we
> decide to give someone commit access to a repo (that's the hard part),
> actually doing it is very easy on github. An example is that we gave
> @mibanescu commit access only to pulp_deb. I think the intent of the first
> point is not to make such a logistical argument, but to describe
> undesirable outcomes of the current policy. It may be more clear to change
> this:
>
> "First, having a single developer team means that in order to give someone
> committer rights to a plugin you have to give that person committer rights
> to all plugins and Pulp core at once."
>
> to this:
>
> "First, when a new developer is added to the single team, they are given
> committer rights to core and all plugins, regardless of which areas they
> intend to focus on."
>
> The latter describes the undesirable outcome, whereas the former could be
> read as "The policy is bad because $POLICY."
>
> The second point ("Second, there are ...") could be divided into two
> points. The first half talks about why it's valuable to know who has
> responsibility for a plugin. (This looks a lot like the third point.) The
> second half talks about the benefits to an individual of being able to
> focus on a specific area. I suggest either having 4 total points, or move
> the first half of point 2 to be part of point 3.
>
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Robin Chan <rchan at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Looks good. I did add a statement between the "<>" in the next
>> sentence.  Please feel free to update - just trying to help articulate
>> the un-stated for clarity and evaluation of the proposed solution.
>>
>> Without clear ownership, feature implementation, bugfixes, and code
>> review all become more difficult because< it is unclear who needs to
>> be involved in the resolution of concerns and who has the final say in
>> disputes (?).>
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 9:43 AM, David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Thanks Robin. I’ve updated the PUP based on your feedback and with the
>> help
>> > of some other folks on IRC. Please feel free to look it over again.
>> >
>> > I’ll wait until about Monday October 30th before I proceed with working
>> on
>> > the rest of the PUP.
>> >
>> >
>> > David
>> >
>> > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Robin Chan <rchan at redhat.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi David,
>> >> I've added some comments - trying to mostly articulate what I heard
>> >> you guys saying last week.  I agree this is a good summary, just would
>> >> like to work on stating the obvious a little more obviously.
>> >> My comments are in red (or whatever this weird muddy pink color is.
>> >> Mauve?)
>> >> Thanks for getting us started on this.
>> >> Robin
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 4:54 PM, David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Last week we talked about forming teams for each Pulp plugin and I
>> >> > wanted to
>> >> > open up a community discussion around that idea. @bmbouter and I have
>> >> > come
>> >> > up with a proposed problem statement [0] to kick off this discussion.
>> >> >
>> >> > We’re looking for feedback from everyone so please feel free to check
>> >> > the
>> >> > statement out and make edits. Or respond to this email with any
>> thoughts
>> >> > about it.
>> >> >
>> >> > After about a week or so, I’ll try to create a PUP based on any
>> feedback
>> >> > we
>> >> > get.
>> >> >
>> >> > [0] http://pad-theforeman.rhcloud.com/p/pulp-plugin-pup
>> >> >
>> >> > David
>> >> >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > Pulp-dev mailing list
>> >> > Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>> >> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>> >> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Michael Hrivnak
>
> Principal Software Engineer, RHCE
>
> Red Hat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20171027/23c269d0/attachment.htm>