Subject: Re: improving project maintainership
From: "Forrest J Cavalier III" <forrest@mibsoftware.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 22:38:09 -0500

Tom Lord <lord@regexps.com> wrote in part,

> "More resources" means that there should be a greater number of more
> senior people being well paid to be full time maintainers for shared
> projects.  There should be a self-imposed "tax" on FS-based businesses
> for that purpose.
> 

Whoa.  "Tax" is a very strong word there. By the enclosure in "" I 
take it to mean that you don't mean a real tax.  Did you really mean
something closer to "ethical obligation"?

I hope you can help me understand something I've missed.

As I understand, arch nicely solves some hard versioning/configuration
problems.  But does every project/product have those problems?  Is
arch always going to be the best way to approach it?

> "Better techniques" means that maintainer-ship should be run more with
> eye towards keeping all the developers coordinated, in spite of their
> divergent goals.  

Why does it make sense to centralize the burden of coordination (at the
maintainer) away from the divergent developer?  Or put another way,
how is the maintainer eventually rewarded for the boost they give to
the divergent developer?