Thanks for the feedback James :-D

I am in the strange situation of both writing/updating polices in the 
developers
guide and then trying to follow them. I kind of wish another community 
member
would do the initial write up (or at least review) so I do not end up with
conflicting/interests.

I (correctly) feel that I am the problem that needs to be repressed; 
asking me
to construct my own cage is not the best move.

Either I end up doing too little (currently ISO Feature work is starting up
for the third time with the end game plan not accounted for); or too 
much (the
proposal template asks for so much information I am not sure anyone will use
it).

James I have added your comments to this page:
- http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOT/3+Module+Maintainers


> On 1/25/07, Jody Garnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> So we have been quite happy changing our process over the last four
>> months; the developers guide has been updated to reflect this ... but a
>> sanity check is needed.
>>
>> Can I ask anyone to review the following pages:
>> - http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOT/3+Module+Maintainers
>> - http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOT/Supporting+your+module
>>
>> Both are "labeled" pending until they have been reviewed. I would like
>> them cleaned up so they can be referred to in statements of work etc....
>>
>> For the complete list please review the "pending" label:
>> - http://docs.codehaus.org/label/GEOT/pending
>>
>> The above two pages (and the concept of idea > unsupported module >
>> supported module) are the priority.
>
> It strikes me that, sadly, we need the concept of supported module >
> unsupported module > abandoned idea as well.
>
> When the owner of a supported module goes awol (not that any committed
> GeoTools developer would ever go missing for more than a month or
> so... ahem...) it looks like there are two options.  1) Find a new
> owner 2) Downgrade from supported to unsupported.  Obvious I guess but
> still something we should document the process - I guess we could
> always demote to unsupported and then start the process of finding a
> new maintainer.
>
> Also the current wording of installing a new maintainer with a 75%
> vote from the PMC should make it clear that this is to cover cases
> where the existing maintainer appears to have dropped off the face of
> the earth.
>
>
> James
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jody
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>>
>> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
>> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to 
>> share your
>> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
>> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV 
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Geotools-devel mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
>>


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier.
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Geotools-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel

Reply via email to