Re: [Axiom-developer] Maintainers

[Gabriel Dos Reis]

root <address@hidden> writes:

| > A single point of failure is when we have only one person
| > 
| >   (1) that has authority to approve and apply changes to the main source,
| >   (2) make official realeases.
| > 
| 
| That is a single point of control, not a single point of failure.

when the control fails to function properly, the development of system
fails to progress. By implication, the "point of control" is a "point
of failure".

[...]

| >    When that single person becomes unavailable temporarily or forever,
| >    the project is stalled.
| 
| I don't recall that everyone was required to stop development.

the availability of the newer version wwas delayed, and nobody else
could do it, because nobody else had the source.

| > Do you want to be remind you how late --patch-50 was?
| 
| And, indeed, life intervenes.

thanks God, nobody blames you for that.  But, it did happen.

As you mention build-improvements; let me point out that I would very
much like to see more people involved, capable of making changes to
the "right" directions so that I do not become a single point of failure.
So, in case you would be under the impression I would like a single
maintainership on build-improvements and question that of gold and
silver, be assure it is not the case.  I've repeated it enough.
And I hope we've gotten build-improvements out of the way.

| The project was not stalled though
| because I spent time getting a hundred copies of Axiom built and
| handed out at the ISSAC conference. The result of this time gained
| us (hopefully) access to Manuel's work and a few other connections
| to other people in our target audience. 

 "... gained us acceess to Manuel's work", in which form?

-- Gaby