On 9/11/12 9:29 AM, Christopher Brooks wrote:
3 (Proposal). Continuing from point 2, committers who have not
contributed in more than a month will retire to committers emeritus.
Hopefully this will prompt our institutional leads to commit to public
Matterhorn development.
-1: One month is not enough time. People often are committers that want
to participate but at a dramatically reduced rater. There is no harm
in them being on the committers list. I would support a 6 month until
emeritus action.
-1 also. Our governance model stipulates a 6 month period of inactivity
before they are moved to emeritus status.
4 (Proposal). We keep a list of committers and their organizations on
the front project (or wiki, whichever's easiest) page. This will
highlight those who are contributing.
0: I'm fine with this.
Regarding placement on the website, we have this here:
http://opencast.org/leadership, which is fairly prominent imo. I'm not
sure this is home page material, but maybe we could post an article
highlighting those institutions who are contributing.
6. To address C, I'm going to start sending out emails containing a
summary of the unassigned bugs for the current release. This will
increase the visibility of these tickets so that developers become
aware of them and address them.
If the frequency is too high it's going to be ignored. Since you're in
a strong position on the release, can I suggest approaching individual
institutions with committers to see if they will fix particular bugs?
I know we're getting infrastructure (e.g. lists of managers) in place
for that at the moment...
Chris
--
=================
Michelle Ziegmann
Technical Project Manager
Educational Technology Services
University of California Berkeley
_______________________________________________
Matterhorn mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn
To unsubscribe please email
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
