On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Brion Vibber bvibber@wikimedia.org wrote:
- It makes sense to have a handful of folks as a core review & planning
group.
- However, I would consider avoiding using the term "Architect" for its
members as it's easily conflated with existing WMF job titles. I think job titles are pretty unreliable indicators at the best of times, and of course can be wildly inconsistent across companies.
Yeah, that makes sense to me. How do you propose that core review & planning group be comprised? You say "a handful of folks", do you mean that literally, or are you talking about a comprehensive maintainers list like the one at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Developers/Maintainers ? If it's a significantly smaller subset, perhaps the current architects should appoint some folks as lieutenants, either Linux-style or on an as-needed basis?
As such, I'd recommend a slightly more formal role for additional "lead reviewers" or "module owners" in the code review & RFC processes
Would that be the same as the "core review & planning group" you refer to above?