From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "John Wiegley" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Another others for maintainer? Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 16:44:00 -0700 Organization: New Artisans LLC Message-ID: References: <87bnbuncw4.fsf@petton.fr> <87bnbtmsli.fsf@petton.fr> <87a8rd7bu1.fsf@gmail.com> <837fmhfouu.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1445385281 7242 80.91.229.3 (20 Oct 2015 23:54:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 23:54:41 +0000 (UTC) Cc: jay.p.belanger@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 21 01:54:33 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Zogje-0003o8-Pr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 01:54:31 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48495 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZogfT-0004lj-A3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 19:50:11 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:41395) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zogdj-0004eB-K7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 19:48:24 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZogdV-0007yh-Dq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 19:48:14 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pa0-x234.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c03::234]:33997) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZogdR-0007rZ-Jh; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 19:48:05 -0400 Original-Received: by padhk11 with SMTP id hk11so35311947pad.1; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 16:48:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:date:organization:message-id :references:user-agent:mail-followup-to:mime-version:content-type; bh=nWZ3ta/Ofgx546kwM26xKiz2Mw5isA2AJSGKAvtdaS8=; b=AvvDQMNF+Buw6RmhWAeofC04sDjUY7Qzz8DMXc7Qz0/hpzvcdcSNmzeszUer+QpkBe tTOkO6zL//NnuaSIOmC9411Zi+IMtrWUbiSNvaPHOUaJisMvJww4sRZEAO7cb02HABAi wVHDWx+72Xt2VfRl6ONm1t7WS3DAH9CMTLfLlbTxAsjXwQnuKNO7YZyGUAn82D+dIiqR 7diwsuhEYhSGFZfOsSVS/xbKmbOoDW1wMthc/5XfAdwQI95a24Ws6FidZeIbg5xKdEdZ 5SNPnTGcaP2Kn/RG5NOT0so27B8y5OxS3vr+owaqtKmqXoUA+nWB4dqZQprJyeZha+tn K2QA== X-Received: by 10.68.65.13 with SMTP id t13mr6945473pbs.43.1445384885052; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 16:48:05 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from Vulcan.local (76-234-68-79.lightspeed.frokca.sbcglobal.net. [76.234.68.79]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c3sm5751377pbu.24.2015.10.20.16.48.04 (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 20 Oct 2015 16:48:04 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by Vulcan.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 61EF2F598DE5; Tue, 20 Oct 2015 16:48:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <837fmhfouu.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 20 Oct 2015 20:10:01 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (darwin) Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii , jay.p.belanger@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:400e:c03::234 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:192245 Archived-At: >>>>> Eli Zaretskii writes: > No, he hasn't. Primarily because I don't know what is expected of a > (co)maintainer that I don't already do. If the answer is NOTHING, then you > already have me, albeit unannounced. In that case, I can give up the title. I have a strong feeling that in the future, we will need to become a more distributed team, in terms of responsibility. The days of one overarching maintainer who knows all and does all are, I think, now over. My ideal scenario is this: - I'm willing to act as "project manager" in the non-technical sense. That is, charting the course, working with contributors, planning releases, keeping an eye on matters of concern, liaising with the FSF. This is a pleasant role for me, and doesn't require daily output. - Eli -- without whom even *imagining* this would be impossible -- would become our primary technical lead, the person I rely on most to keep the ship aright and stay on top of bug submissions and patches. Eli and I, in turn, would start assigning responsibilities and delegating to others, until we have a distributed team of hopefully 10-20 people, each with their own time, energy, experiences and expertise. For example, asking Sacha Chua to help us stay on top of community affairs. "Many hands make light work", and I think these hands will be the only way we can successfully move forward, given that we don't have Stefan Monniers or Gerd Moellmann's jumping out of the woodwork these days. My hope is that rather than having people like Eli stop contributing due to burnout, we'll be able to support them with a steady influx of new blood. It's just a matter now of finding those people. Maintainership should really be a community burden, but with just enough hierarchy that we don't become stalled by indecision. John