On Tue, 2019-10-22 at 14:00 -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 1:55 PM DJ Delorie <d...@delorie.com> wrote: > > Even if we all agree on the "big picture simple answer" the details and > > "best practices" are just as important. > > > > Do you have any suggestions for filling in these details? > > The day-to-day running of things should certainly be documented somewhere. > > I have suggested wiki.gnu.org as a central place where the community > can come together and document best practice. > > Even if the wiki is eventually codified into a real manual, it has to > start somewhere and grow from there.
Having a central place for a collection of "how this GNU project is run" examples is a good thing. But I am not sure every project really follows the same kind of decision making process. Although there are probably a couple of roles that have somewhat clear rights and responsibilities (contributors, developers, committers, uploaders/release managers, project maintainers) that might be similar for most projects. A lot of the details depend on the size of the developer community and how you split things up when the project grows. Do you create sub-components with subsystem maintainers or really separate sub-projects with with their own (co)-maintainers? Do you have global maintainers/reviewers or a global/subsystem consensus model? So if we do turn that a "manual" I think it should be in the form of governance templates for how you could organize (and grow) a GNU project, which a project can then adopt and adjust to their specific community situation. Cheers, Mark _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
