On 05.02.2017 22:02, Stefan wrote: > On 2/5/2017 15:45, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote: >> On 04.02.2017 17:53, Daniel Shahaf wrote: >>> I wrote the following in a thread on private@, but the issue need not be >>> discussed confidentially: >>> >>> Daniel Shahaf wrote on Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 18:05:27 +0000: >>>> I've noticed that some threads don't happen. >>>> >>>> Examples: >>>> >>>> - stefan2 solicited reviews of his authz branch. None happened. >>>> >>>> - SVN-4670 was filed with a trivial patch. Nothing happened. >>>> >>>> What worries me isn't the reduced activity — that's to be expected — >>>> but >>>> the complete *lack* of activity around these and other threads. That >>>> activity level is lower than I would expect, even taking into account >>>> that we're now mostly volunteer-run. >> Since more or less all committers contribute in their >> spare time these days, not only the "intensity" of >> interaction will go down. >> >> What we do see instead is that people appear to be >> very active for a short period of time - a day or two - >> and then become silent for a longer period of time, >> maybe for weeks at a time. Those periods of activity >> often don't overlap, which makes interaction harder. >> The amount of back and forth discussion will probably >> go down. >> >> I think that as a community, we need to adapt our >> expectations / communication to that new pattern. >> Things that might help: >> >> * Allow for at least 2 weeks of reaction time for >> silent consensus etc. >> >> * Send an notification post to dev@ before starting >> some larger work - people may not follow commits >> closely anymore. Not as a vote or anything but simply >> to keep people in the loop. >> >> * "Ping" a thread that you _really_ want feedback on >> after 2+ weeks of inactivity. >> >> None of these need to be codified; they seem like >> pretty common sense for a project with much more >> asynchronism. >> >> -- Stefan^2. > Wouldn't it be possible to also consider getting some > funding/sponsorship/donations? > > If enough money gets donated maybe some of the existing committers could > arrange something with their dayjobs (as in being able to work like 20% > on SVN) and therefore be able to contribute more time on SVN than they > can right now? > > Also if some specific features would be put up as examples for > committers who would volunteer to work on a feature, that might be > caught up by companies who are willing to pay for getting the feature > into the subversion core (LuaJIT used that approach, for instance, quite > successfully).
The ASF does not accept donations toward any particular project. Whilst we might encourage companies to fund individual developers, we solicit donations for specific features. -- Brane
