Hoooo boy are you barking up the wrong tree.
I also do not partake in "full stack" anything anymore. I am a software developer, but I can only work on one problem at a time. Dividing my time among a thousand little problems, most of which aren't of any consequence to the success of a company, is a surefire way to get trash as a result.
Observe how Facebook and Google have entire *cities* worth of people working for them at any given campus, and yet, they have never replicated their early successes since. Google Checkout, Wave, and Orkut were all disasters. Facebook's having a bear of a time trying to manage abuses of its product, having been caught red-handed in accidentally helping to manipulate the 2016 election.
Finally, software development and engineering are team efforts; I don't want to "own" anything. I've been there, done that, got all the t-shirts the companies I worked for provided, and I can say definitely, it's the wrong model.
NO CODE OWNERSHIP. That's what underlies the success of extreme programming, and Kent Beck had it absolutely right. Code ownership is bunk. Anyone who tells you otherwise is either grossly inexperienced in the industry or trying to sell you on their misguided attempts at being a "thought leader." Whatever that means.
No thank you. Respectfully, I will pass on this opportunity. But, thank you for reaching out. Maybe some day, there'll be a good fit for me. Or, maybe, I'll end up working at Walmart again. Whichever comes first. 🙂
@vertigo I've noticed some CODEOWNERS -type files in a few Github repos. It feels very 1993, but in a bad way.
@alrs The nice thing about having a file like that is, if you have a question about the code, you can reach out to them to ask it. But, the *ownership* model is, IMO, a bit broken for much of everything else.
If I were ever to adopt a similar convention, OWNERS or CODEOWNERS would never be my first choice of filename. Maybe EXPERT or OFFICE-HOURS or some such instead.
@alrs In any event, the latter approach would also differ in that it's voluntary to list yourself there, not compulsory like so many corporate or high-profile FOSS management teams require.
@vertigo "git-blame" tells you more than any CODEOWNERS.
@alrs That tells you who tweaked the code, but they may not have the complete picture of how the code should work, or how it fits into the bigger picture of the complete system. I find that having an 'architect'-like role on the team is invaluable.
Server run by the main developers of the project It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!