> On 17 May 2024, at 16:39, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think Andrey Borodin's nearby suggestion of having a separate CfM
> for each section of the CommitFest does a good job revealing just how
> bad the current situation is. I agree with him: that would actually
> work. Asking somebody, for a one-month period, to be responsible for
> shepherding one-tenth or one-twentieth of the entries in the
> CommitFest would be a reasonable amount of work for somebody. But we
> will not find 10 or 20 highly motivated, well-qualified volunteers
> every other month to do that work;
Why do you think so? Let’s just try to find more CFMs for July.
When I felt that I’m overwhelmed, I asked for help and Alexander Alekseev promptly agreed. That helped a lot.
If I was in that position again, I would just ask 10 times on a 1st day :)
> it's a struggle to find one or two
> highly motivated, well-qualified CommitFest managers, let alone ten or
> twenty.
Because we are looking for one person to do a job for 10.
> So I think the right interpretation of his comment is that
> managing the CommitFest has become about an order of magnitude more
> difficult than what it needs to be for the task to be done well.
Let’s scale the process. Reduce responsibility area of a CFM, define it clearer.
And maybe even explicitly ask CFM to summarize patch status of each entry at least once a CF.
Can I do a small poll among those who is on this thread? Would you volunteer to summarize a status of 20 patches in
July’sCF? 5 each week or so. One per day.
Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
