[Geomoose-users] RFC-4: GeoMoose Commit Management

[Eli Adam]

It looks good to me.  I would support it as is, minor suggestion below.

If you want you can hedge this, "Dan Little and Jim Klassen will be
the Git Administrators." to something like, "Initially Dan Little and
Jim Klassen will be the Git Administrators, changes will be handled by
regular PSC processes."  My reading of the current text would require
amending the RFC to have a change which seems like a high bar for
something that is administrative rather than policy.

I suppose that you could delete it entirely and then at the next PSC
meeting would could set it, or when you call for vote, offer two
things to vote on: RFC?  Git Admins?

Thanks and Best Regards, Eli


On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 6:29 AM, Jim Klassen <klassen.js at gmail.com> wrote:
> Updates applied:
>
> 1) Changed COMMITTERS to AUTHORS.rst in one place for consistency.
> 2) Added bit from Brian F re unmaintained features.
>
> Any further comments?
>
> Should we change the title from "GeoMOOSE Commit Management" to "GeoMOOSE Git Push Management"?
>
> http://www.geomoose.org/trunk/rfc/rfc-4.html
>
> On Jun 20, 2013, at 7:43 AM, Brian Fischer wrote:
>
>> Jim just one small commit to this sentence.  I would add a sentence at the end to handle the situation if no one is found to manage the code.  Otherwise looks good to me.
>>
>> "The new committer should also be prepared to support any new feature or changes that he/she commits to the GeoMOOSE source tree in future releases, or to find someone to which to delegate responsibility for them if he/she stops being available to support the portions of code that he/she is responsible for."  ADD SOMETHING LIKE THIS.  In the event no delegate is found to support the code, it will be subject to removal pending discussion by the PSC.  Each feature that falls into this situation will be handled on a case by case basis.
>>
>> Brian Fischer
>> Principal | GIS Project Manager
>> Houston Engineering, Inc.
>> O 763.493.4522 | D 763.493.6664 | F 763.493.5572
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: geomoose-users-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:geomoose-users-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Jim Klassen
>> Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2013 7:16 AM
>> To: geomoose-users at lists.osgeo.org List
>> Subject: [Geomoose-users] RFC-4: GeoMoose Commit Management
>>
>> Are there any final comments on RFC-4: GeoMoose Commit Management?  It has been sitting out there for almost a month now.
>>
>> If not, I will call a vote on RFC-4 next week.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Geomoose-users mailing list
>> Geomoose-users at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geomoose-users mailing list
> Geomoose-users at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-users