On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 14:48 -0400, Marc Paré wrote: > Le 2010-10-20 14:10, Drew Jensen a écrit : > > On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 13:16 -0400, Drew Jensen wrote: > >> On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 16:57 +0200, Gianluca Turconi wrote: > >>> Il 20/10/2010 16.36, Mike Dupont ha scritto: > >>>> 1. what will it cost if you have to rewrite the authors code and all > >>>> derived works. > >>>> 2. what if you just remove the code > >>> > >>> Contributions are not only code. There are a lot of intangibles. > >>> > >>> Marketing, lobbying and advocating work are some examples. > >> > >> Please let us not expand what defines contribution. > >> > >> Lobbying should not IMO garner admittance. > >> > >> Advocating should not. > >> > >> Working on this project(s) should be the only work that counts. > > > > Actually, I would need to amend that last sentence: > > > > > > Work on the main project or it's accepted sub-projects. For instance > > there may be extensions - either directly as Add-ons to the LibreOffice > > package, possibly even extensions to desktop packages with features > > specifically created to support LibreOffice and the ODF. > > > > Thanks > > > > Drew > > > > > > So you are proposing that a contributor is someone who has contributed > either hard code or plug-in code etc. to the project. The contributions > MUST be associated some way to code or ODF code convention.
If you are asking for membership and your area of contribution is coding then yes - but it is not the only type of work that is considered. > > Presumably then, no one other than a dev or dev-like contributor could > become a TDF member. The draft on the wiki specifically lists marketing and other actions as working on the project. > > So, let's take me as an example, I am part of the Canadian Marketing > Team which is starting from zero resources and contacts. If I make > arrangements for Marcon's in our 12 regions of my country; make > arrangements for large city LibO representatives; make arrangements for > a national conference with conference facilities for our newly expanded > Canadian Marketing Team and then try to find corporate sponsorship for > both Canadian Marketing Team and LibO advertising and installfests etc. > This according to your criteria would not suffice to award me membership > into the TDF. > > Would this not, in some way, be considered as a contributor to the TDF? > > If not, then how would I be able to make my voice heard to the TDF > membership when there was an issue that I would consider important to me > or LibO? > > If yes, then, what measure could we use, to consider such a person as > described, to award membership status. How much would a person have to > contribute (I am still taking my example as Canadian Marketing Team > member) to be awarded membership status? See my response to Charles and Mike a few minutes ago for my thoughts on that. > > For that matter, how about the people providing on the localization > projects? Again specifically mentioned in the draft. > > IMHO, I believe you are skipping one major step by establishing > membership criteria to the TDF. The hierarchy must be established first > and then define membership. That is one approach - I don't think it is one that most here would sign onto..but could be wrong. I'm still chewing that over.. > The hierarchy is pretty well evident as I > has posted my suggestion re: this before and out of coincidence James > Walker, in a different way, suggested, on this thread, the same > organization of the TDF project as I had. I am sure that we will not be > the only ones to define it this way as it is the natural way to organize > the groups. (I quote James Walker here for the sake of convenience, below) Thanks - I'll add comments to that email from James. Drew -- E-mail to [email protected] for instructions on how to unsubscribe List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
