[llvm-dev] [PITCH] Improvements to LLVM Decision Making

[Robinson, Paul via llvm-dev]

Trying to define a process without defining who implements the process seems a bit cart-before-horse, and I'm happy to see people debating how to compose the Core Team or equivalent who will implement the process.

LLVM to date has really had only one distinguished role, which is Code Owner.  Other projects have a more defined set of roles, and the LLVM community might benefit from that.  (I had one dev meeting proposal rejected due to lack of participation by a "core contributor" which left me at something of a loss, as LLVM has no such defined role.)

So, defining a Core Team or equivalent seems like a worthwhile preliminary step.  Whether they choose to adopt Chris's decision-making process proposal or something else, should be up to them IMO.
--paulr

From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of Chris Lattner via llvm-dev
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2020 1:59 AM
To: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
Subject: [llvm-dev] [PITCH] Improvements to LLVM Decision Making

Hi Everyone,

Numerous people have been bringing up challenges with consensus driven decision making in the LLVM community.  After considering this and seeing the frustrations it is causing many people, I think we should make a formal process change to help improve decision making going forward.

Here is the outline of the draft proposal<https://gist.github.com/lattner/e3679998a7609c99b1243f09d30f0132>.  Caveats: this is itself just a draft proposal to inspire discussion not a mandate - I welcome feedback, thoughts and concerns, ideas of how to make this better, or better ideas/approaches overall on how we can level up the community.

Please let me know what you think, thanks!

-Chris



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200116/4cffdaf4/attachment.html>