Fine - we will definitely collect our thoughts and put together a more
accurate report for next board meeting. Thanks for clarifying and pointing
this out.
Regards,
Raffaele
On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
<[email protected]>wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Raffaele P. Guidi
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Ok, good to know, we'll try to expand on that, then, but, of course the
> real
> > problem is that DirectMemory has not any corporate sponsorship and is a
> tool
> > that addresses a niche requirement (applications that cope with HUGE
> > quantities of RAM). Not having a large diffusion it of course limits the
> > number of developers interested in contributing....
>
> Having that kind of info in the board report is much better than the
> terse report that we received: it tells the board that the
> DirectMemory PMC is aware of the relative slowness of the project, and
> either doesn't think any actions are required at the moment, or thinks
> that things will slowly improve.
>
> As a board member, my main question when I read a project's report is
> "is this project viable or is it in trouble" - making us aware of
> *why* you think your project currently has little activity, and if you
> think this is a problem or not, helps.
>
> -Bertrand
>
