On 10/19/05, Lothar Schenk <lothar.schenk at gmx.de> wrote:
> (1) Assign maintenance responsibility on a per class basis. That is, every
> class in the system should have an appointed maintainer.
>
I think package-granularity is ok, and there's no pressing need to put
the borders between maintainers on class level because class
extensions work ok...

> (3) Last, and most important: If a class (or package) doesn't have an assigned
> maintainer, it doesn't get maintained! No changes whatever, even the
> slightest one. This means no enhancements, no bug fixes, nothing whatever.

Heh. I could actually approve of this idea, but then I'm known to
follow 'risky' strategies ;)

Anyway, I'm looking at 3.9a to see what stuff I'll put on my plate.
It's about time that people simply start grabbing chunks of the image
to maintain... Everyone agrees that code ownership is a good idea, but
no-one actually stands up and says "I am going to maintain Collections
from now on"...