On 14 Nov 2002, at 1:39, P Witte wrote: (...) > Quite some work has already been done by various people, > such as tidying up the code to make it suitable for general > distribution, adding various tools and help utilities, and > Marcel has added some significant improvements to the code > base which were previously only available to SMSQ-E for QPC. > All well and good so far :)
Yes, and until now my job consisted more or less to play catchup with the code supplied by Marcel (and Fabrizio). (...development being people driven) There is, of course, no way that I, nor anyone else, can force anybody a) to contribute b) to contribute in any given direction. I DO try to nudge people in the right direction, by asking whether they couldn't do some development in such and such area. As an example, I have asked one person whether he couldn't make the necessary developments for the "home directory" to be used by jobs. (You do remember that, don't you? :-)))) I am in the process, however, of trying to collect the different ideas different people have given me at different times to have an overview of what should be done. In my opinion, there are, basically, three kinds of projects: 1 - Small improvements (e.g. Fabrizio's italian language support). By "small" I DO NOT mean unimportant - but they are improvements that can be handled by a single developper in not too much time. 2 - Important changes - the new WMAN and, possibly, rewriting the mass strorage device drivers for more/better/different/true etc directory support and longer filenames, come to mind. 3 - Adaptions to various machines. It is probable that many a development will need to be adapted to some machines more that to others. I had already mentioned the idea of a "key developper" for each machine, but that hasn't really been taken up. So how do we go about this? We can have a general scatter load approach, everybody doing something in the corner, alone - as you pointed out, this will peter out pretty quickly. Or, as you rightly suggest, we can have some form of centralisation, where, at the least, track is kept of the progress in different areas. The best way, IMHO, would be to have somebody to parcel out the work. However, in view of the fact that the QL scene is pretty individualistic, and that my "perceived authority" seems to be on the low side, I think this is rather irrealistic... So, your idea of a website could be a pretty good one. The thing that is stoppping me for the time being, is the feable number of developpers. Again, the question is whether it is worth it to go through all of that, just for four or five people. Ok, so the argument will be that if we don't do it that way, nobody else will participate etc.... I don't believe that for a second, I also don't believe that doing it this way will bring back the Q60 crowd into the fold. But - why not, if there is a sufficiently strong demand for it. (the website could): > > Hold general information about the project yes. > List the sub-projects yes > List planned developments yes > List the developers and their areas yes - if the developers want. > List progress information yes > List the resellers and registrar yes > Allow downloading of components to registered developers This is the area where I balk the most. By making the sources available to everyone, I still hope to draw people into development, who whould not, normally, have done so. Making a distinction between registered developers and those who are not (and don't have accessto everything) makes me pretty uneasy. As an example, I do not know whether Fabrizio would have become a registered developer? The fact is, that it was decided to keep destribution of the sources in a certain way. Doing it on a website means either detroying this way of duistributing the sources, or introducing a difference between "normal" QLer and registered developers. If there really is a majority opinion to do it that way (and I would like EVERYONE'S opinion on this) I'll bow to it, though. BTW, what do you mean by "component"? Moreover, one of the disadvantages of the website will, of course, be that some control is removed from me (at least that is a disadvantage in my eyes :-)). For the time being, most of the developers speak to me, and, as said above, I try to nudge them in a general direction. If we set up a website, the developers will speak to each other. I'm NOT saying that this is a bad thing but it will mean that development will be made on a more ad hoc basis. As the software registrar, with a mission to try to keep unified versions where possible (and thus, trying to steer the thing a bit), that must leave me with fixed feelings, of course since my power to influence things will be diminished (if it ever existed). But again, if this serves the community, I have no problems with it > Allow downloading of the latest binaries to registered users That would be a definite no. The users should get their updates from the resellers. The developers don't need to download the binaries - recompiling everything is a five minutes process! Moreover, some kind of validation process must take place, to make sure that new versions are stable, before they are passed on to the user. > Hold the documentation OK - perhaps a link to already existing info? > Allow downloading of utilities related to development Provided they are not sold, yes - many of them are already on the CD.. > Allow bug reports and feedback OK > Hold a support database (a la M$'s Knowledgebase) THAT is a LOT of work! > > Im not suggesting the registrar do this as it is a major > project in its own right. I couldn't build the website. I don't have the time, space nor money to do that. However, Dave has suggested something along the lines, I think he would be agreeable to this. > Of course this may go against the licence as it stands - in > practise, though not, if I understand correctly, in spirit. Except for the distribution of binaries, it IS compatible with the licence. As I had already pointed out to Dave (who suggested something broadly similar) this suggestion was taken into account when drafting the licence, so it will not need to be changed for that. Wolfgang
