[zeromq-dev] Felix Geisendörfer's "hack", C4 process

[Pieter Hintjens]

On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Ian Barber <ian.barber at gmail.com> wrote:

> As long as the rules in Felix's post are followed (e.g. for meaningful
> patches, with accounts that have some rep) I think that's a good idea. We
> should communicate the C4 principles, primarily so that people don't just
> commit directly to the repo, but other than that I have no problem. It would
> be good to occasionally clean out the list of maintainers as well though, so
> we don't end up in a situation where it looks like we have X maintainers,
> but actually there are very few who are actually involved.

OK! I've published a protocol revision at
http://rfc.zeromq.org/spec:22. The main change is this new section:

+++ Project Administration
* The project founders SHALL act as Administrators to manage the set
of project Maintainers.
* The Administrators SHALL ensure their own succession over time by
promoting the most effective Maintainers.
* A new Contributor who makes a correct patch SHALL be invited to
become a Maintainer.
* Administrators MAY remove Maintainers who are inactive for an
extended period of time, or who repeatedly fail to apply this process
accurately.

So when we get contributors with meaningful rep who make decent
patches, I'd suggest a comment like this:

"Thanks for your pull request. Would you like to join the Maintainers'
team so you can also help review and merge other peoples' pull
requests? If so, could you read http://rfc.zeromq.org/spec:22 and
confirm that you understand this protocol?"

-Pieter