forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Crossley <>
Subject Re: Community health
Date Sat, 18 Mar 2006 12:10:19 GMT
Thorsten Scherler wrote:
> David Crossley escribi??: 
> > Ross Gardler wrote:
> > > However, there are more general community issues here as well, and I
> > > would like to look at them. Here are three community observations (and
> > > as far as I am concerned the really important part of this):
> > >
> > > 1) Some people seem to feel that the normal ASF meritocracy is not
> > > sufficient credit within Forrest. Why should Forrest be different from
> > > other ASF projects? Do we need to do something different?
> Hmm, what is your definition of normal?

See the end of my previous email in this thread.
In my copius spare time i plan to add a section
to our project guidelines to define exactly
how we currently acknowledge contributions.

Then we can discuss in a calm manner whether
any of that needs changing. Or hopefully each
one of us can fine-tune and edit that in
the normal opensource fashion.

> I assume then that
> ...
> are not normal? 
> If not, should we not then bring this up either in a broader audience or
> in this projects directly?
> If it is normal, then why should Forrest be different from other ASF
> projects?

We have already suggested to create a "timeline"
to help the history. It will take me a long time
to get that together, so be patient.

The history of how the project came into being
is a minor issue. The main issue seems to be
recognition of contributions.

> > I reckon that we don't need to change anything that
> > we are currently doing. If someone feels that we do,
> > then they need to make an explicit proposal.
> Did you not read my words and Tims about live-site?
> Do you think we should write them again?

See above.

> > There are some things that we do need to do better.
> > Better use of changes.html (often we forget to
> > add entries). Get better at noticing new committed
> > people.
> Well, how do you want to do that?

Each one of us needs to add entries to status.xml
for the substantial changes. Not for every miniscule
change that an automated svn log system would do.
People can use 'svn log' for that.

On the committer front, you already know the process.
The trouble is that existing committers are not
doing their job. It is a long time since we added
any new committers. It is up to each of us committers
to notice other deserving potential committers,
then propose them.

That is what i mean by "get better".


View raw message