[Dev] Rotating build sheriff duties?
twl at osafoundation.org
Wed Dec 7 23:18:15 PST 2005
I like this *less* than I like the sheriff idea. It sets a "be good
or else" kind of tone, which might be okay in a purely corporate
environment, but is not the kind of tone that I would like to see in
an open source project.
On Dec 7, 2005, at 8:03 PM, Lisa Dusseault wrote:
> On Dec 7, 2005, at 7:38 PM, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
>> The rotation seems like a nice theory to solve the same issue, but
>> in practice it seems unlikely that any given sheriff-of-the-day is
>> going to be particularly enthusiastic about confronting such
>> issues. After all, why argue today when you can let it slide till
>> tomorrow? This will just further exacerbate the problem of a lack
>> of social pressure and continue to enable the idea that this is
>> just bureaucracy or whatever excuses are being used.
> I've seen teams where the "build monkey" was the guy who last broke
> the build. That guy would have to keep the job until somebody else
> broke the build. This provided real incentive to check things
> out. Team members groused about having the job but not too much at
> all, and often the build monkey *would* implement some system fixes
> while he was in the job. Overall I got the impression that team
> was very happy with the system as it raised quality overall.
More information about the Dev