Hi Fritz >> >>> - Anybody willing to work on such a "project" can submit a "quote" >>>(price >>> tag) for doing and give a completion date for it. >>> >>> Note, the price tag could even be 0, this would at least tell others >>> interested in the project that it is already being taken care of. >> >> I'm cautious of bid/accept because a lot of well-meaning ambitious >>people >> (in OS in general, not Qx) announce plans and projects without carrying >> them through (including me) or finishing them properly eg documentation. > >That's why they'd have to give a completion date. > >People not finishing the job properly would not get paid and would most >likely not get any "assignments" in the future. > >There is some trust to be invested towards the "customers" actually >paying, >but with small enough bits and pieces I think this would be acceptable. > >> Bid/accept means an obligation to do it and the project has to commit to >> one person finishing it - and a commitment for the project to deliver >>the >> cash at the end of the day. That's a perfect relationship for some >> projects, but there is also a place for no-obligation, >>first-past-the-post >> competition approach. IMHO that's not too different to OS principals >> where the best projects filter to the top. > >So 5 people submit a solution to the same problem?? 5 times the >effort and for loosers ...
Yes, and this is how it should be for OS developments - there is no contract to provide something only accumulated trust. The merit of an OS project is defined by the product that is produced at the end of the day; thousands of new OS projects are imagined every day and only a small fraction reach production quality. The traditional bid/accept/deliver model means you have to trust the provider to deliver and I'm skeptical that this will always be possible - however, there is no reason why some projects cannot be offered on a traditional bid/accept/deliver model while others are on a first-past-the-post basis. > >>> - Anybody interested in contributing can pledge some (or all) of the >>> required resources. >>> >>> - The implementer(s) do the work and submit it as patch or as a >>>contrib. >>> >>> Here some 1&1 oversight/interaction would be required, especially in >>> the case of patches. >> >> For sure, only 1&1 are committers right now so maybe the community could >> help review and test patches according to certain coding standards etc. > >At least some coding standards can be "enforced" by using the generator >(pretty, lint) and by requiring testing code. The core team has a testing >infrastructure in place, cross-browser and all. > >I'd worry more about patches and contribs being in sync with the >"Qooxdoo-coding-philosophy" and general architecture. Sure, there would need to be standards in place and trust by 1&1 to specific community members to uphold their philosphy and standards....if 1&1 wanted to allow non-1&1 committers. > >>>> (b) the project is democratic but the bigger the prize you donate == >>>> the more vote you have, and (c) disputes are arbitrated by the >>>>1&1 Qx >>>> team. >>> I'd rather avoid the voting part ... >> >> I know what you mean - bureaucracy is not a good thing, but if I put up >> some cash (or some beer ;) I want a fair amount of choice in the result. > >Hmm, this is how it works with all our paid work we do. The customer tells >us his problems/wishes, we make a proposition on how to solve it including >price tag, the customer orders, we implement/deliver, the customer pays >happily ... > >We (usually) don't implement something and then ask the customer if he >likes >and and if he would be willing to pay for it ... > >Of course the customer can ask other providers for suggestions and decide >on >which provider/solution to choose. > >What other choices do you envision? I meant that where there is more than one person/company funding a project there has to be some means to arbitrate disagreements which would should be simple and easy > >> IMHO there has to be a difference between the community just asking for >> wishes and the community reliably participating in the process. Maybe >> there could be some non-cash rewards that could be offered too, eg 1&1 >> "Most Valued Contrib'er"? :) > >That sounds very "american" to me, like "employee of the month" with a >special parking lot assigned to him/her in front of the main entrance ... :) > >I think our contribs being mentioned in the weekly news and also them >being >available in the contrib tree and hopefully being used by others is enough >non-cash reward ... Those are a big plus, of course, and already there are a load of contribs, I was trying to think of ways to incentivise a strong enough relationship between 1&1 and specific community members to allow for non-1&1 staff to become committers. John ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Start uncovering the many advantages of virtual appliances and start using them to simplify application deployment and accelerate your shift to cloud computing. http://p.sf.net/sfu/novell-sfdev2dev _______________________________________________ qooxdoo-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qooxdoo-devel
