Glynn Foster wrote: > Hey, > > Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote: > >> Hi Eric, >> >> Sorry about the delay, I'm in the middle of travels. >> You are definitely an important contributor of the desktop >> community, in particular your blogging and spreading the word >> about the build tools used in this community. I think there's >> a bit of an issue, though, with granting [core] contributor >> status based on spec-files-extra contributions. SFE is not an >> opensolaris project at all, although it's clear that it's closely >> related to the desktop community. There's also pkgbase, but >> it has not really taken off (yet ;) and it's not even endorsed by >> the desktop community. (I'd like to see that happen, btw). >> > > I've gone ahead and added a few more endorsed projects that relate to various > initiatives within the desktop space - if anyone has more suggestions of what > projects we should endorse, don't hesitate to shout out. > > >> Talking about spec file contributions in general, I personally >> don't think it makes sense to pick any number for a limit >> to become a core contributor. For example, Sun employees who >> are part of the desktop group have lots of spec files, but >> I wouldn't give them core contributor status if they don't >> participate in any community discussions. Maybe not even >> contributor status. Actually, I don't think we need any >> rules for this, it's a case by case thing. >> >> BTW, you missed 2 core contributors: Erwann Chenede and Doug >> Scott were elected just after the OGB elections. I guess >> it should have been announced on this list, sorry about that. >> >> Anyway, that's my opinion, what do other core contributors think? >> > > I think generally we need to figure out some sort of defined ladder that > allows > people to get contributor or core contributor status - it needs to be a little > more defined than gut instinct somehow. >
I would hope that the ladder eventually has a rung for those whose contributions fall into categories such as documentation, Q/A, distribution creation, discussions and porting (e.g. spec-files-extra contributors) which mightn't necessarily appear as spec-files contributors at all. If we only allow coders to be contributors, we might end up discouraging these other kinds of contributions. I understand that this becomes much more difficult to measure. I also understand that we don't want thousands of Sun employees to dilute the contributor and core contributor categories because they've all contributed in some way. > Maybe something like a non-trivial contribution gets contributor status, and > continued contributions of the period of, say, 6-12 months gets > core-contributor > status. We'd probably need some sort of membership working group to admin some > of this. We're way ahead of a lot of other community groups in wanting to > figure > this out. > > FWIW, I think Eric's definitely done enough to get contributor status - though > I'd like to get an idea of where we put core-contributor status on that > scale, a > little bit more before we go granting anything more. > > > Glynn > _______________________________________________ > desktop-discuss mailing list > desktop-discuss at opensolaris.org >
