@bistenes First of all, thank you for this well thought-out proposal. As others have said in the thread, there’s very little to find objectionable about it especially in the area of defining module owners and / or people responsible for modules.
I’d just like to put some numbers around this, since that seems to be a key question. Going through the various dev levels, as defined on Talk, we have:
- 17 /dev/5s (~7 active)
- 6 /dev/4s (~ 3 active)
- 37 /dev/3s (~ 10 active)
(The “active” counts here are very subjective; I haven’t backed it with hard data, but these are based on people I’ve seen actively contributing to Talk, Jira, GitHub, Slack, IRC or w/e)
Of that group, I don’t know how many would be willing and / or able to take ownership of one or more modules. Certainly, the count is a little disappointing: ~20 senior devs to ~40 components that make up the RefApp distribution. That’s not to mention the ~210 other repositories that exist in the GitHub organisation (some of which are definitely actively maintained; many of which are probably not).
All that’s to say that we probably need to prioritise which modules we move into the new structure and which we keep in some kind of “community-maintained” mode as a practical matter.