[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
RE: [cdt-dev] Vote for Committer Restructuring
|
> though it is almost the same as submitting a patch.
I'm not suggesting things be similar to patches. I think the
interaction needs to be more at the "design" stage and not so much with
the implementation, unless the implementer has questions about the
existing code/architecture.
Regards,
Leo
-----Original Message-----
From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Mikhail Khodjaiants
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 12:01 PM
To: CDT General developers list.
Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] Vote for Committer Restructuring
Sounds good to me, though it is almost the same as submitting a patch.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Treggiari, Leo" <leo.treggiari@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "CDT General developers list." <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 11:49 AM
Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] Vote for Committer Restructuring
>I don't have any suggestions for collaboration tooling, but I have a
> possible suggestion on process. I agree with giving committers access
> to all parts of CDT, but do have some concern regarding maintaining
> "architectural integrity" of the various sub-areas of CDT. Could we
> define the role of "sub-area lead(s)/architect(s)/whatever we might
want
> to call them". The idea would be to have one or more committer in
each
> sub-area who should be consulted by other committers when they want to
> make significant changes in a sub-area, or want to make a fix and just
> want to make sure they are doing the right thing.
>
> What do others think?
>
> Leo
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Doug Schaefer
> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 10:54 AM
> To: CDT General developers list.
> Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] Vote for Committer Restructuring
>
> Mikhail K brought up a great point with me in the hall. As we get more
> committers working on the CDT, the need to communicate and co-ordinate
> with
> eachother grows as well. We have all run into instances in our
> development
> careers where someone changed some code out from under our feet and
> caused
> us more work that we had planned.
>
> As project lead, I'd like to make sure we have the right
communications
> channels in place to ensure that conflicts are minimized. If anyone
has
> ideas please let me know. We have a server on the net,
cdt.eclipse.org,
> that
> we can use for some kind of collaboration tooling. I'll snoop around
and
> see
> what I can find.
>
> Thanks, and I look forward to first having this problem and then
solving
> it
> :),
>
> Doug
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> On
>> Behalf Of Mikhail Khodjaiants
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 10:49 AM
>> To: CDT General developers list.
>> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] Vote for Committer Restructuring
>>
>> +1
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Doug Schaefer" <DSchaefer@xxxxxxx>
>> To: "CDT General developers list." <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 3:49 PM
>> Subject: [cdt-dev] Vote for Committer Restructuring
>>
>>
>> > Hey gang,
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > As we talked about at the summit, I'd like to restructure the
> committers
>> > list to allow all code committers full access to all of the CDT.
> This
>> > will allow current committers to fix bugs and implement features
> that
>> > spread across plugin boundaries in the CDT.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > We will still apply restrictions to people who only want to commit
> docs
>> > or tests and who don't want write access to the code (projects
> labelled
>> > Doc and Test below). We'll also keep the contrib plugins separate
> from
>> > the main CDT.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > The mechanics can get tricky, but we'll try the easy way first, by
>> > calling a vote for all committers to access everything. If we get
>> > objections, we can call for more detailed list by list vote.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > After we resolve this, I will also be nominating others who have
> made
>> > significant contributions. But let's get through this first.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > So without further adieu, I call for the following people for
> committers
>> > to the following projects in the CDT. These people are already
> listed as
>> > committer on one or more of the subprojects. If I forgot someone,
> please
>> > let me know and I'll add them (once I remember them actually being
a
>> > committer, that is). Also, people on the list can take this
> opportunity
>> > to have themselves removed if they no longer wish committer status
> :-(.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Please review carefully and vote (remember only committers have a
> vote,
>> > although we appreciate everyone's thoughts on this)
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Committers:
>> >
>> > - Alain Magloire (QNX)
>> >
>> > - David Inglis (QNX)
>> >
>> > - Mikhail Khodjaiants (QNX)
>> >
>> > - Thomas Fletcher (QNX)
>> >
>> > - Sebastien Marineau (QNX)
>> >
>> > - Leo Treggiari (Intel)
>> >
>> > - Mikhail Sennikovsky (Intel)
>> >
>> > - Chris Recoskie (TI)
>> >
>> > - John Camelon (IBM)
>> >
>> > - Andrew Niefer (IBM)
>> >
>> > - Bogdan Gheorghe (IBM)
>> >
>> > - Sean Evoy (IBM)
>> >
>> > - Hoda Amer (Independent)
>> >
>> > - Vladimir Hirsl (Independent)
>> >
>> > - Chris Wiebe (Independent)
>> >
>> > - Doug Schaefer (Eclipse CDT Project Lead/QNX)
>> >
>> > - John Duimovich (Eclipse Tools PMC/IBM)
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Projects:
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.core
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.core.aix
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.core.linux
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.core.linux.ia64
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.core.linux.ppc
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.core.linux.x86
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.core.linux.x86_64
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.core.macosx
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.core.qnx
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.core.solaris
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.core.tests (Test)
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.core.win32
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.debug.core
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.debug.core.tests (Test)
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.debug.mi.core
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.debug.mi.ui
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.debug.ui
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.debug.ui.tests (Test)
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.doc.isv (Doc)
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.doc.user (Doc)
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.launch
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.make.core
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.make.core.tests (Test)
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.make.ui
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.managedbuilder.core
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.managedbuilder.core.tests (Test)
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.managedbuilder.gnu.ui
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.managedbuilder.ui
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.managedbuilder.ui.tests (Test)
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.refactoring
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.refactoring.tests (Test)
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.releng (Test)
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.sdk
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.sdk-feature
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.testing (Test)
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.testing-feature (Test)
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.ui
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt.ui.tests (Test)
>> >
>> > - org.eclipse.cdt-feature
>> >
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> cdt-dev mailing list
>> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
_______________________________________________
cdt-dev mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
