On Tuesday 21 July 2009 11:37:17 Leo Sauermann wrote: > agree > (shoots, now I wasn't silent...) > > once a ticket is agreed, only the ONTOLOGY MAINTAINER should do the > change to the actual RDF file on the SVN, > what do you think?
Usually yes, although I don't see the ability to delegate the commit to another person if it's the easiest way out. > and please remove now the procedures that are invalid and document this > here: > http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/oscaf/wiki/OntologyMaintenance Hmm I'm assuming I should add myself as a backup maintainer for all NIE -based ontologies? Actually I'll gladly oversee other ontologies if it's needed. I can commit sufficient resources to this within the next several months. Anyway within several months we'll have the ontology stabilized. > It was Evgeny Egorochkin who said at the right time 21.07.2009 00:45 the > > following words: > > Hi guys. > > > > Now that our collaboration infrastructure is set up and flames are over, > > we're supposed to start improving ontologies. > > > > Unfortunately the laid-back approach of people sometimes commenting on > > some random ticket takes a bit more time to get issues resolved than it > > could have(from my experience of course). Also, some direction as to what > > needs attention right now might help, if not increase the rate of our > > progress but at least would cause less troubles to people who depend on > > our work by addressing the most important issues first. > > > > So my proposal is: > > > > I find a ticket that doesn't have any blockers or dependencies, so it can > > be resolved right now, I start bugging people, asking for opinions etc > > etc. > > > > Bugging doesn't mean getting in the way or distracting from important > > matters. It simply means attracting sufficient attention to get stuff > > done, asking for feedback issues, coordinating discussion. > > > > This way we don't have to wait 2 months to know for sure that people not > > commenting on the issue are ok with whatever direction it takes as > > opposed to being unaware of its existence or something. Also > > communications may take simpler forms such as a list of wants and needs > > from a particular Nepomuk stakeholder as opposed to a thought out > > proposal. > > > > Thoughts? Ideas? > > > > P.S. Silence = agreement. You've been warned ;) > > > > -- Evgeny _______________________________________________ Xesam mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xesam
