Re: I resign as Guile maintainer

[Lynn Winebarger <owinebar at free-expression dot org>]

On 2 Dec 1999, Gary Houston wrote:
> It isn't clear to me that there's any obvious candidate for chief
> maintainer, but wouldn't it be feasible to simply grant the relevant
> powers/responsibilities to all of the Guile developers?  There's
> already a privileged group who have full access to the CVS repository,
> so it would be a simple extension.
> 
> It seems to me that having a single maintainer has turned out to be a
> bottleneck at times in the past.  This is not a criticism of the
> abilities of the maintainers, but there have been times when they've
> been busy elsewhere and Guile development has suffered. I suspect the
> same thing would happen if I was the chief.
> 
   Alternatively, it might be wise to establish a (small) group of
maintainers, each with their own pet areas to oversee, but each able to
take up some slack if another is temporarily unavailable due to work
obligations (or whatever).  In addition, they might be able to work out a
somewhat more structured approach to work being done on GUILE, and how it
fits together.  While I'm not normally a big fan of committee thinking, a
few smart people able to look at the big picture while providing in-depth
knowledge of some areas and willing to work together can be a good thing.
This would allow the code review mentioned by someone else (not sure whom,
sorry), while not dispersing responsibility to widely, and not requiring
too great an individual commitment.

Lynn