[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Looking for a new Emacs maintainer or team
From: |
Mike Mattie |
Subject: |
Re: Looking for a new Emacs maintainer or team |
Date: |
Mon, 31 Dec 2007 16:14:03 -0800 |
On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 15:22:53 -0800
Dan Nicolaescu <address@hidden> wrote:
> Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > > Once Emacs 22 is released, I would like to hand over
> > > Emacs maintenance to one person or a small team. The new
> > > maintainer or maintainers would take responsibility for
> > > making sure new releases are made and that they are
> > > reliable, and for focusing attention on priority projects
> > > for improvement.
> >
> > Is this still the plan? Last time this was discussed on the
> > list many very capable volunteers were found.
> >
> > A few people volunteered, and they could be useful members of a
> > team, but (as I recall) they didn't include the most
> > knowledgeable people.
>
> OK, if this is the cause of the blockage, then let's work on what your
> criteria would be for choosing the maintainer(s).
>
>
> One proposal was to have a committee with 3 people:
>
> - a "technical lead" which is responsible for the "quality" of the
> major modifications to the software (i.e. C and Lisp code).
>
> - a "release manager" which is responsible for the release, including
> documentation, copyright stuff, packaging, etc (basically anything
> else)
>
> - a "chairman" (the third person) who has the "final word" on any
> disputes in the committee, based on an overall understanding of
> Emacs "policies, history and visions" (whatever they are)...
I don't think that is a very good description of a chairman. A chairman
arbitrates procedure and typically does not vote. With your triad
you cannot even reach a quorum without the chairman.
Creating a political structure is non-trivial with many subtle pitfalls.
Programmers are not automatically skilled at this simply because they
work with complex systems.
Most of the politically structured projects I have read, or participated
in functioned more like an Asperger's convention than a decision making
process.
I think a benevolent dictator who can interact with people according
to social norms is key for a project, especially when the profession
is considered a haven for High Functioning Autism and a variety of
other handicaps.
A leader should be able to understand the people he leads, where their
strengths can be used, and how to avoid the certain pitfalls inherent
in every personality. If a committee helps then it's a good thing.
The one certainty of this thread is that it will grow like cancer until
the constitutionalists form a separate mailing list.
Just stating the obvious from the back row.
> And there were volunteers for these positions: Kenichi Handa, Chong
> Yidong and Stefan Monnier.
>
> If you'd like more people on the committee, why not just nominate them
> and maybe they will accept?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature