Solutions for the PR load problem

[Shaun Amott]

On Fri, Jul 09, 2010 at 06:15:58PM +0200, Dominic Fandrey wrote:
> 
> To solve this problem with the current organization, my guess is
> that between 15 and 30 new active committers are required.
> Because I don't think this is easily achieved I want to suggest
> a different approach. And I expect many others also have their
> own ideas how this can be solved.
> 
> Proposal:
> My idea is that experienced Maintainers get commit permission
> for their own ports. I don't even think such a thing needs to
> be enforced technically, after all who'd want to risk his
> experienced maintainer bit, however this is possible (and people
> would probably sleep better).
> 

The whole VCS debate has been had over and over; I think that for the
time being it is more constructive to look at changes we can make to our
existing processes. Anything that requires switching from CVS isn't
going to happen any time soon.

One thing that is sorely missed -- by me, at least -- is the ports
tinderbox mini-cluster we had previously (graciously provided by simon
and erwin). The major bottleneck in the review/commit process is the
testing part (again, I speak for myself). A set of tinderbox machines
representing the tier-1 architectures, to which we could grant
contributors access, would reduce the burden on committers (if a
patch/PR arrives with an accompanying log file).

Shaun

-- 
Shaun Amott // PGP: 0x6B387A9A
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin
of little minds." - Ralph Waldo Emerson