Thanks for listening to our grumpiness! ;-) On Sep 2, 2013 12:24 PM, "Raffaele P. Guidi" <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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 >> > >
