On 9 June 2013 20:35, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote: > On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote: >> >> On Jun 9, 2013, at 9:40 AM, Ian Lynch wrote: >> >>> My main thought was market confidence. If LO can say they have 26 >>> developers working on code it would be interesting to have a >>> comparison on a similar "like for like" basis. >> >> Before we can make a like for like comparison we need to understand the TDF >> process: >> >> From the page you cite: >>> Certified Developers are present TDF members, were nominated by the >>> Certification Committee, and subsequently peer-reviewed by the Engineering >>> Steering Committee. >> >> But there is also a disclaimer (with a grammatical error of translation): >>> Notes on the aforementioned entries: our list of certified developers is >>> for your information, alphabetically sorted, and not necessarily complete >>> nor up-to-date. Specifically does TDF not recommend nor endorse any of the >>> listed companies. Interested parties are asked to individually assess if >>> the listed companies are suitable for their respective requirements. If you >>> notice mistakes or inaccuracies, please inform us >>> ati...@documentfoundation.org. >> >> Unless we can replicate this process I am afraid that any "like for like" >> comparison may be fodder for press FUD. >> > > For the same credentials (and 100 pounds) one can become a Knight of > the Sovereign Military Order of Sealand: > > http://www.sealandgov.org/title-pack/knight > >> We would need to use a publicly measurable approach like "more than X >> commits to the code base". It is likely that X would need to be supported by >> examining the commit logs of LO and comparing with their list finding the >> person with the least commits who is on their list. >> >> If someone can provide this comparison then I would support a blog post. >> This could also point to our full committer count to show that the project >> values all contributions. >> >> We can also emphasize that at the ASF it is individuals and not companies >> that are contributing. >> > > The other part is this: what the market really needs is an easy way > for any competent developer to learn AOO programming, whether macros, > extensions or core, and be productive. This is a need for good, > up-to-date documentation, sample apps, etc. When that is in place > then we might be lucky enough to have a large number of developers who > are not also committers. But until we've more fully enabled this > larger developer ecosystem, then any certification program would > merely be self-dealing, as it appears to be with LibreOffice. And > that doesn't really accomplish anything. It is just heaping titles on > the same core rather than extending the reach. > > Regards, > > -Rob
It wasn't so much the certification part that seems important. More that there are 26 people who are judged to be capable of (and probably willing) to make a significant contribution to LO code. How many AOO people can similarly be identified? Its just a simple thing if its easy to present. I'm not suggesting anyone spend a lot of time on it. -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications Headline points in the 2014 and 2015 school league tables www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
