[Framework-Team] Framework Team membership, release manager, roles and responsibilities

[Alec Mitchell]

On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 8:29 AM, whit <d.w.morriss at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 4:25 AM, Graham Perrin <G.J.Perrin at bton.ac.uk> wrote:
>  > > From: Andreas Zeidler <az at zitc.de>
>  >  > Date: 26 February 2008 23:46:24 GMT
>  >  > To: George Lee <georgeleejr at gmail.com>
>  >  > Cc: framework-team at lists.plone.org
>  >  > Subject: Re: [Framework-Team] Re: WebDAV changes
>  >  >
>  >  > On Feb 24, 2008, at 9:51 PM, George Lee wrote:
>  >  >
>  >  >> P.S. I think that as a matter of process it make sense that a
>  >  >> release manager can make / ask for a major revert for time's sake,
>  >  >> but that the framework team should then speak up on that because
>  >  >> ultimately it's supposed to be their decision and what they're
>  >  >> accountable for.
>  >  >
>  >  > no, not really.  the framework team's job is to review and give
>  >  > recommendations to the release manager.  the decision to merge or
>  >  > not to merge (or revert for that matter) is made by the release
>  >  > manager, though.
>  >  >
>  >  > cheers,
>  >  >
>  >  >
>  >  > andi
>  >  >
>  >  > ps: also see http://plone.org/development/teams/framework/faq
>  >
>  >  1) <http://plone.org/development/teams/framework/framework-team>
>  >  states that
>  >
>  >  > The Framework team is only responsible to accept/reject PLIPs
>  >
>  >  -- to me, that sounds like decision making ;)
>
>  but of something completely different.
>
>
>  >  OK so the preceding paragraphs, and <http://plone.org/development/
>  >  teams/framework/faq>, are more explicit, but <http://plone.org/
>  >  development/teams/framework/framework-team> in its entirety could be
>  >  misinterpreted.
>
>  framework team was never intended to make any decisions beyond
>  recommendations to the release manager on what to include in a
>  release.  This was part of the big reason to choose new members after
>  making the recommendation so the community would not mistake the power
>  of the framework team as extending beyond making recommendations and
>  acting as the gatekeeper for plips and the code associated with them.
>   Choosing new members frees up FWT members to work on the release
>  without any confusion by the wider community about them still making
>  decisions about what goes in release.
>
>  the framework team wasn't intended to be a primary decision making
>  body, but to aid to the release manager, who can take or leave what
>  the framework team recommends and has the latitude to make any
>  necessary decisions outside of those recommendation.
>
>  it seems this time around time obligations for review were a bit of a
>  problem. for next, I want to bring up an old option, the external
>  review. As long as the FWT makes sure someone relatively unbiased
>  reviewed the PLIP and voted on it, it didn't matter who did the
>  reviewing.  the main thing is someone conscientiously looks at the
>  code and writes a coherent review.    Maybe next time around it would
>  be worthwhile to line up a few extras ahead of time to review code in
>  case of life offline happening ;)

+1 allowing FT members to bring in others to aid in the review process
can only help matters, both in terms of making their job more
manageable and making it clearer that the FT is not some all-powerful
cabal.

Alec