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