Decentralizing reviews: Policy for subteams?

[Juan Negron]

Hi all:

I agree with most of what Jorge wrote.  I still need to be sold on the
following:
<snip>
The subteam would manage itself, without needing
acks for future additions/removals/admin of the team needed.
</snip>
There is the _risk_ of diverging from the standing policy and/or diluting
the quality of the charms.  Some measure of meritocracy should be put in
place.

I also strongly agree with Clint on the amendment of the policy to include
the responsibility associated with being a team admin.


Thanks,

Juan


On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Jorge O. Castro <jorge at ubuntu.com> wrote:

> Ok so Mims figured out how to segment the charm store so that we can
> have individual teams take over a charm, this would allow, for
> example, the Juju GUI team to rev on their charm quickly without
> blocking on ~charmers.
>
> So over time we'd see things like "postgres-charmers" and
> "openstack-charmers", and so on, all independently reviewing their own
> work without blocking in the big queue.
>
> As far as who owns the team, right now the consensus on IRC is
> "~charmers create and own the groups", with a +2 needed to create a
> team, with the understanding that the team cannot be open (so that any
> person could join.) The subteam would manage itself, without needing
> acks for future additions/removals/admin of the team needed.
>
> Clint would also like to add a new snippet in policy that ~charmers
> explain the responsibilities for team admins, "with great power comes
> great responsibility." and all that.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> --
> Jorge Castro
> Canonical Ltd.
> http://juju.ubuntu.com
>
> --
> Juju mailing list
> Juju at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/juju/attachments/20130319/a2b67619/attachment.html>