[Dev] Rotating build sheriff duties?

[Ted Leung]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Dec 7, 2005, at 4:29 PM, Heikki Toivonen wrote:

> I am not so sure we can eliminate the sheriff completely, but if I can
> be proven wrong I would be happy. It also seems like nobody is
> disagreeing that we need sheriff currently because the tools are what
> they are.

Actually, I don't think that we agreed on this point, which might  
account for the heat generated in this thread.   Before today's  
message I saw one message in favor of sheriff's (Philippe) and one  
message not in favor of sheriff's.   I don't view that as a  
conclusive indicator of either agreement or disagreement.   I think  
that this got enacted too quickly.

Not much that can be done about that now, but something to be aware  
of in the future.

> But since one wanted out: are there others who don't want to help out
> with sheriff duties while we improve the tools?

Since it is important for the tinderboxes to stay green as much as  
possible, and since there seems to be an abundance of volunteers to  
work on the tools,
I'm willing to act as a sheriff until the tools get fixed.   I think  
that we should all try to take additional care while the tools get  
fixed.

Ted
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFDl5HOvrorh/X8S0IRArr7AKCPIklf0E82aHA0HVZYUHVu8UTEyACePZ18
y2CBHbOW5CO0J3gljpmPe6g=
=5LJI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----