couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joan Touzet <>
Subject Re: [REQUES] Review proposed bylaws (Was: Re: [DISCUSS] Project bylaws)
Date Mon, 26 May 2014 21:01:34 GMT
On the "COPDOC" thing:

> > On 20 May 2014 23:43, Jan Lehnardt <> wrote:
> >> 2.3. would specifically invite designers, both visual and user interface designers.
Not sure we need a name like COPDOC.
> > 
> > I started down this path of listing things we're interested in, but it
> > got too long, so I spun it off into a new doc.
> > 
> >
> That’s good, but still lacking e.g. designers. The bylaws should include a summary,
and/or a pointer to the 
> Contributor Guide.
> > The COPDOC stuff has prior art:
> > 
> >
> I’m hearing this for the first time, I’d be afraid to sound overly complicated for
no good reason and it 
> doesn’t include some groups of folks that we (should) care about. “People that we
care about contributing to 
> CouchDB” doesn’t need an acronym to make any clearer what we mean.

I hadn't heard the acronym previously, and a quick web search doesn't turn up any other uses
of it. Still, the list of "what we value," just like the list of "we don't discriminate against
these things" should be ever-expanding. I am not opposed to spinning this lit out and instead
saying something like:

  "We value contributions that include, but are not limited to: community, project, documentation,
code, visual design, internationalisation, ..." and then link to the contributor guide as
a full resource.

My rule of thumb for something like bylaws is: if we have to change the bylaws ever, we made
a mistake. That should happen every year or two *max*. If something is liable to change often,
spin it out into another policy doc and go from there.

View raw message