On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 11:11, Sergiu Dumitriu <[email protected]> wrote: > On 03/16/2010 10:51 AM, Guillaume Lerouge wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Vincent Massol<[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> I'd like to move this topic forward. Thus I've now created a draft of the >>> XWiki.org Governance that gathers what I had proposed at >>> http://markmail.org/message/fxqvprtbb5vyog6g >>> >>> The Governance page is currently at: >>> http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Drafts/Governance
Sounds good >>> >> >> Sounds good overall. As one could expect, the 2 gray areas to me are: >> >> "The notion of active is currently left to the appreciation of the XWiki >> Committers." > > Well, it is a little bit more clear in the Committership page: > http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/Community/Committership : > - becoming a committer once "enough" good patches are applied > - becoming emeritus if a whole year passes without a commit +1 to reuse committers rules, it's the same thing for me. > >> and >> "Right now the definition of contribution level is not strictly defined" >> >> I would be ok to go ahead without those 2 specified more closely but I'd be >> in favor of defining at least a loose metric or some indicators that would >> be publicly displayed somewhere so that anyone could come and see for >> himself, "this is where most commits come from". Some kind of public >> dashboard maybe, similar to the one we have at: >> http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/ProjectHealth >> but updated in real time with the names of the committers& their number of >> commits - if that's doable of course. > > This would be really easy to do with JGit reading a Git clone of our SVN > repo + charting macro. > >> WDYT? >> >> Guillaume >> >> >>> Please review it and vote. The idea is then to move it to >>> http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/Governance in a few days. > > "or with a "Products" tab in some top level horizontal navigation" => I > don't quite like it. How many products do we have? IMO, not many enough > to require a top level entry. But I agree with the Download page. > > "we require that the company/individual have at least one active > Committer" => How about companies that invest a lot of money in *our* > developers, sponsoring important, major features, like the Office > importer, or the social dashboard? Or is the Supporters page enough for > them? > > "The notion of active is currently left to the appreciation of the XWiki > Committers." => Why does a company have to be active continuously? > > > I would like to see stated somewhere (not necessarily on this page) that > most committers are from XWiki SAS not because XWiki SAS pushes its > employees as committers, but the other way around, because XWiki SAS > wants to sustain the best contributors by offering them a job, so it > pulls employees from the committers (or promising contributors, future > committers). > >>> As usual, non committers don't have binding votes but are still very much >>> encouraged to give their opinions. Their voice is especially more important >>> on this topic since most committers are from XWiki SAS and thus I feel we >>> need at least a general agreement from the community at large before doing >>> anything. > > -- > Sergiu Dumitriu > http://purl.org/net/sergiu/ > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > -- Thomas Mortagne _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
