Hi folks,
An ArchCom RFC triage (per
<https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T125865>) was penciled in for this
past RFC meeting (<https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/E144>), but I was
out for jury duty and wasn't able to make the push for this or
facilitate it if we stuck with my hasty plan. I'm done now, and would
be happy to accommodate assuming everyone is available and up for
helping out with a triage for this coming meeting on Wednesday
2016-03-02 (<https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/E146>)
The point of the triage would be to try to ensure that more RFCs have
assigned shepherds on ArchCom. That, in turn, would hopefully make it
more likely for an RFC to make it through the process more quickly.
Instead of having to ask all of ArchCom status about a particular RFC,
there would be a single ArchCom owner to check in with.
Any RFC that doesn't have a shepherd is not likely to move through the
process. There are always going to be several RFCs that don't have
shepherds. Just submitting an RFC doesn't guarantee that an ArchCom
member will think your RFC is important. Life is hard that way. Make
your case!
Note also: shepherd != slave. Even when an RFC has a shepherd,
there's no guarantee that the RFC is a high priority for the shepherd.
Certainly, the shepherd's credibility as a worthy ArchCom member is
potentially damaged by foot dragging, but don't bank on being able to
dump blame on the shepherd if your RFC isn't going fast enough for
your taste.
Thoughts?
Rob