Re: Formalizing teams

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi! ⛄

Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> skribis:

> Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com> writes:

[...]

>> We'd have to include every language/system of importance to that list
>> (Python, Ruby, Emacs, LaTeX, Perl, etc.), no?
>
> No, only those where we already have the people who could form a team.
> There is no need for any of this to be comprehensive.  It just needs to
> be an improvement over the status quo.

+1

> FWIW, I’ll gladly make it official that I could be the person to talk to
> when it comes to “R packaging”.  This is already the case, but only
> those people know it who don’t really need to know this.

Yes, and…

> Advertising this kind of information or recording it somewhere where our
> tools could redirect incoming requests would be an improvement.

… yes; see also “The Tyranny of Structurelessness”.  All this looks fine
to us insiders because we know the untold structure of group; to
outsiders though, it makes it harder to join.  It’s about making space
for newcomers.

> I do think it’s a lack of organization, yes.  Today I’m no longer
> following guix-commits, guix-patches, or bug-guix, and I’m overwhelmed
> by guix-devel and help-guix.  Whenever something catches my attention
> I’ll read a bit and maybe reply.  But by far the best way to get my
> attention for a review is to ask on #guix or #guix-hpc or to
> X-Debbugs-Cc (or Cc) me on emails.

I suppose people could explicitly Cc: the team you’re on when they need
specific advice or review; that should already help.

> Having some topic-specific streams I could tap into would allow me to be
> a little more proactive.

This brings a related but slightly different topic: how to let people
filter incoming patches and bug reports in general.

How does it even work on git*.com?  Do they let you subscribe to
issues/merge requests that match certain patterns or touch certain
files?

Thanks,
Ludo’.