Iain Shigeoka wrote:
> I think its a great approach but too much work for us. We're having
> trouble keeping people involved without any more over head. If JOS
> actually had a functional system, then I can see how this organization
> would really help. And I think we really should be actively thinking
> about how to set this up. But practically speaking I don't think we
> have the number of developers needed to really need this.
We don't, but if we use the JSR mechanism as a standard way of
presentation, then more people can easily join later on. See, the expert
group could be just one person, the submitter. When more people come,
the group will be larger. Anyway, we have documents like JSR's on the
Wiki, and a single name as the owner of the project (I remember making a
page for the registry myself, but am not very sure). Let's make these
formal, along with the process of standardizing the JOS website.
> In all honesty, I think we really just need a few really bull-headed
> people to take this thing by the horns and set a direction for the
> group. The number one problem seems to be lack of ownership. The
> project started out as a committee idea and so no one person is "THE
> DESIGNER". And most of us are a bit too polite and cautious to really
> just take the reigns.
Quite true... Maybe there is something we could do about this. Let's
assume that JOS does not belong to anyone, and it belongs to everyone.
Let's also assume that people who are already members (their name
appears in the member list on the Wiki) have priority over future
members or those who are not in the member list. Now, let's compile a
list of people who believe they are capable of being bull-headed and
grasping the thing by the horns, but are too polite to do that. Let this
list be available on the Wiki, and let anyone who already has his name
on the member list put his name (regular Wiki editing procedure).
Let this list be on public display for a month or two, and then lock it.
Then keep it in display, and request a veto from anyone who has his name
on the member list. If, after two or three months this list is up nobody
claims that he does not like the people who are on the list, then let
these people be the "owners" or at least the people who can take the big
decision in JOS.
Although this is not the most democratic procedure, at least its
initialization seems very fair. Everyone will have a chance to be one of
those people, and everyone will have a chance to object. After that, the
group will be responsible for admitting more people.
The owner of jos.org (I guess we should consider you, as you do the
HTML, right?) must be in this group. Apart from that, I hope Gilbert
will be on it (he has made the CD distributions, after all). Also, I
think it would be reasonable that the few people who contribute very
regularly to [EMAIL PROTECTED] should be on this list, as they have had
more experience in working with each other (well, at least discussing
with each other).
What do you think people?
Also:
> <snip> The task should naturally fall on me but I've been very busy at
> work and spending all my limited spare time trying to stay away from
> the computer! :)
>
> I promise to address it soon though.
I understand how time hinders everyone, on a personal level.
Standardizing something three years after its creation and three years
of web chaos can be hard. I will volunteer to help, if you wish, and I
would also like to make a public call to anyone with good designing
skills to also help. Maybe if each of us created a sample of the
organization and design of a new JOS website, and then formed a small
group that worked to implement it, things would be faster and easier for
you.
> Agreed. The current tactic I would propose is to tell every one to
> create separate SourceForge projects, that link back to JOS. JOS's
> website will create a link directory going back to the individual
> sourceforge projects. Sound reasonable?
It sure does. And it does not have to be a SourceForge project, it can
be anything. The JOS website should only contain things related to JOS,
no separate projects (except for a few links, of course). Just because
the JOS distribution may contain certain Java applications, it does not
mean that these applications should be confused with JOS. Let's keep JOS
pure and make sure that all we do is an operating system. If someone
wishes to make a JOS distribution along with other applications, then
let's think about that only *after* JOS starts existing.
> The only problem/question being that its going to take a big effort to
> really kick start a restart (or a throw away of the throw away
> prototype). Do we have the manpower for that right now? I personally
> am stretched a bit thin currently so don't know how much I can give to
> the effort.
We'll have to simply start, even if it means only one person working.
Even if one HTML page is written per day, it is better than naught.
Unfortunately I can see that there has been little pressure to finish
work, on programming and website level, so the only way is to get
"slowly but gradually". IMO, at least.
--
"Though this be madness, yet there is method in't."
- William Shakespeare
________________________________________________________________________
[MAIL: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] [URL: http://www.outworld.org/people/al/]
[TEL1: (30) +31 422392] [TEL2: (30) +31 428154] [CELL: (30) +937 110247]
[ICQ#: 11876955] [DSS: 0xDBEF8ECC] [RSA: 0xBC469499] [TIME: GMT +2.00 H]
[ADDRESS: 14 Argonafton St., Kalamaria, 551 31, Thessaloniki, Greece GR]
DO NOT SEND ME ANY UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL, POLITICAL OR RELIGIOUS E-MAIL
_______________________________________________
General maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://jos.org/mailman/listinfo/general
