Not quite a timeline. There can never be a timeline with an open source project, because no-one can be held to that timeline. I'm more saying, break it down into small enough tasks to create things that are objectively useful of themselves in manageable amounts of time. That way, we'll draw in developers who want to use those bits, and are interested in adding more.
Open source development does not work the same as commercial development, as the motivations are entirely different. My boss can tell me I must write something I really don't want to, but it doesn't work that way in open source - the project has no power to make me do anything at all, in which case, timescales are pretty useless. Upayavira On Thu, 7 Apr 2016, at 10:37 PM, Gaurav Shukla wrote: > I second Upayavira on this, the project brief looks fine but it should be > broken down into meaningful sub tasks with a proper timeline. > > > > > > > Sent with MailTrack > <https://mailtrack.io/install?source=signature&lang=en&referral=gshukl...@gmail.com&idSignature=22> > > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 12:40 AM, Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, 7 Apr 2016, at 07:08 AM, Evan Hughes wrote: > > > Hello all, > > > > > > This is a project brief that some new interested developers asked for, > > > please note that* this is for the Apache Wave rewrite *project "A Wavy > > > Future" due to the potential of the rewrite not being the main source and > > > not for the current source which exists in the repo. > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WAVE/Project+Brief > > > > > > Please feel free to give feedback either here or on the document if you > > > have an account. Also note that some sections of the document are > > > unfinished like the timeline. > > > > Evan, > > > > You are presenting something pretty monolithic - it could be hard to get > > a group of developers to work together on such a large endeavour. > > > > Can you break it down into smaller pieces, each of which are useful in > > themselves? If you can present something like, "here is an OT engine > > that can be used by any project, and will take 1mth to develop", then > > you have something distinctly useful, and something that is much more > > likely to draw in new developers, because the project HAS something they > > can immediately use. > > > > The best way to develop open source is to tap into developer's sense of > > their own self-interest. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Upayavira > > > > > > -- > Regards ! > Gaurav Shukla > gauravshukla.xyz
