[development] adoption for 'abandoned' modules?
larry at garfieldtech.com
Thu Jan 11 21:55:04 UTC 2007
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 12:50:16 -0800, "Boris Mann" <boris at bryght.com> wrote:
> On 1/11/07, Robert Douglass <rob at robshouse.net> wrote:
>> Personally, I think that modules should have deputy maintainers or
>> co-maintainers. This should be done by module maintainers just by
>> talking to the other people interested in their work and selecting one
>> to have "emergency" CVS access. Most of my modules have a clear 2nd (and
>> sometimes 3rd) in line. I'll review the rest and find more people for
>> the rest.
> +1...I don't think it's too onerous of a recommendation to have a 2nd
> person with CVS commit access. Might not necessarily happen, but
> perhaps when we get some more time we can institute a review process
> that scans for inactive (i.e. no commits) projects every quarter.
That seems reasonable to me. Just listing it on the "how to maintain a module in CVS" page in the handbook (or whatever it's called) as a recommended good idea would be helpful and not intrusive.
(And if anyone wants to be a back-up on nodereview, googlesearch, or menutree, my contact tab is active and awaiting you... <g>)
More information about the development