Thanks for the clarification and example. Sounds like the manual scenarios aren't so plentiful that a hierarchical reporting structure is needed.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Thanks for the clarification and example. Sounds like the manual scenarios aren't so plentiful that a hierarchical reporting structure is needed.
I think so. After I posted this comment, I just went and marked a PR as one needing review and testing ( https://github.com/IEEEKeralaSection/rescuekerala/pull/1003 ) so, once things stabilize we will not have trouble handing the project.
In RC changes and SMT changes there could be manual scenarios. Once we stabilize like the state where we are now, we will not need a very elaborate hierarchical structure. Numerous projects starting from GNU's GCC, Bash, Emacs, Linux Kernel all have tried and proved that the community approach will work. But yes, in most of the above cases, the community had a "benevolent dictator" or a well defined code-of-conduct.