Hello again! First of all, let me express my thanks to all of you who joined in on this thread (started at http://lists.xwiki.org/pipermail/devs/2012-April/050416.html) to support me in my quest to better understand the way open source development works in XWiki. :)
As I've mentioned in my last email, I have some more questions I would like to ask. Last time I focused on general aspects of the process, today's topics revolve around the project's architecture, roles and governance, and knowledge management. So my first question this time concerns the architectural design, and how it has evolved over time. Did the basic structure change / grow significantly since the early days of XWiki? Vincent mentioned the change from a monolithic code to small modules. Were these and other changes made in some major refactorings, or rather through steady refinement? To what degree is it an issue to keep backwards compatibility between releases? Also I am interested more closely how the functions and responsibilities are divided in the team. Caty wrote about 'very clear departments' in her last answer, and the teampage on XWiki.com lists a multitude of different and specific roles. Both of your descriptions of the testing process, however, suggests a less strict separation of tasks. So what role do the roles play? How specialized or cross-functional are the teams and people working therein? Is there a difference between XWiki.org and XWiki SAS? In a related matter, many of the role descriptions of the core developers contain manager and leadership titles. What, in practice, are the main tasks of the people managing the development? Many meritocracies have safety nets, some rules to follow or people to go to when no consensus can be reached on important topics. Did this ever occur in XWiki? What would be done in such a situation? Have either the formal roles or the informal merit people earned in a special field some kind of influence on the weight of their voice in a dispute? And last but not least some questions about the access and distribution of knowledge: XWiki features an extensive written documentation of itself and the process used in its development. What is the role then of additional, personal communication, of the proverbial informal talk at the water cooler? Is the necessary time and ceremony of written documentation always justified by making the knowledge permanently available to everyone, or can you think of exceptions? Again, every answer or comment is greatly appreciated, Martin _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
