Re: [rt-pmc] CQ approvals

[Jesse McConnell <jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx>]

yes, it is hard because sometimes there is an appearance of a 'rubber
stamp' going on but then every once in a while dependencies end up
sparking a fair amount of discussion...

_perhaps_ the thing to do is periodically make a list of open CQ's to
this list for open discussion and 'group resolution'

that might be a good idea for some of the projects like virgo and
gemini that frankly have me in shell shock with the unbelievably
massive volume of just stuff going through CQ

that might help more people become comfortable with it and it could
also inspire those of us that have done some to get our arses in
collective gear and approve some in the off times :)

I have just had a nasty string of busy this summer but I should be
able to go through the process more this week.

jesse

--
jesse mcconnell
jesse.mcconnell@xxxxxxxxx



On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 17:07, Jeff McAffer <jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This is a fine idea (reviewing the pending list every PMC meeting).  It would be great to get a wider range of PMC members approving CQs as well.  I suspect that at least in part we are suffering from "its summer (i.e., vacations) and "Helios burnout".  With only a few PMC members looking at CQs the load is not well spread. I worked closely with Jesse in the spring to go through CQs together and effectively mentor him on the general approach and things to consider.  Perhaps others could/would do the same?
>
> I also think that resolving and concluding on the FAQ issues will greatly improve the throughput.  Each time we get one of these "build dependencies" I have to do some IP archeology to figure out how each case is to be handled.  This is too much overhead and risks being inconsistent.
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> On 2010-08-03, at 11:53 AM, Mike Keith wrote:
>
>> In the absence of a formal process (assuming that "everybody jumps in when they feel inspired" does not count as a formal process) the CQs do not seem to be getting discussed/approved, which kind of makes progress difficult. For example, by my count there are 16 CQ's waiting for approval for the Virgo project and 3 for the Gemini Web project. I could go through and look at each of these, but am frankly a little hesitant given that a) there may be some history that I am not aware of wrt to a particular library b) it doesn't seem quite above board for one person to go through and approve everything for a given project. Can we at least have a standing PMC meeting agenda item to look at existing open CQs waiting for approval and give everyone in the meeting a chance to look at them and state whether they think there would be any issues? This would not preclude the existing casual individual approvals from occurring, but would at least make sure that a CQ is only ever in the "waiting for approval" state for a maximum of 2 weeks (though in practice it would be much less). Thoughts?
>> _______________________________________________
>> rt-pmc mailing list
>> rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
>
> _______________________________________________
> rt-pmc mailing list
> rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
>