15 Mar
2010
15 Mar
'10
5:26 p.m.
On Dec 16, 2009, at 11:05 AM, Fabio Mancinelli wrote:
On Dec 4, 2009, at 3:44 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Yes this is hard.
One idea is:
- number of LOC (patches not included - we need to reward committership which is a
commitment on the long run)
- when same number of LOC then use alphabetical order.
Thanks
-Vincent
Governance Proposal
=================
1) xwiki.org is controlled by the XWiki committers. This means that
important changes brought to it should be discussed/vote on the list,
using the same practices as for code commits
+1
2) xwiki.org stays open in edit mode to all
external contributors (and
XWiki committers continue to monitor it to remove spam, etc)
+1
3) we agree to start with 3 zones where companies
can advertise their
commercial offers on top of the XWiki open source product:
-- On the download page (for business packages, subscriptions, hosting)
-- On the support page (for services: support, consulting)
-- (still to be defined) Possibly on a "Products" tab in the new
horizontal navigation. The idea would be to do as jboss.org is doing.
Projects are open source and community and Products are commercial
+1
And I agree with Marius' remark about the fact that only products that are built on
top of XWiki could be advertised
4) the company offerings are listed by their
amount of contributions
to the XWiki open source project. The company that contributes most
(XWiki SAS today) gets the best spots (top of the list, bigger space)
+1
This however is tricky...
In order to define what "contribute most" means we need a metric, and
that's not an easy thing to do.
Maybe we could use a linear combination of weights assigned to the priority an issue has
and an index for its "perceived" difficulty (I saw people tagging issues with
their difficulty when handling the backlog in a Scrum-oriented process). Maybe LOC-count
could go into the mix (the less the better :)) And maybe also time should influence the
result (company that had a punctual high-quality contribution should not be listed forever
if it stops contributing)
The ranking is calculated wrt to this combination and a minimum threshold should be
reached in order to be ranked.
I don't really know how to handle this, but if we propose a ranking we need also to
propose a policy about how it is calculated. 5) Companies who want to be listed should provide
some proof of their
contributions to the XWiki open source project
+1
6) XWiki SAS gets some acknowledgment for paying
for the xwiki.org
server/maintenance of it. Probably somewhere in the footer of the site
or on side panel somewhere
+1
7) xwiki.org should always remain a site for the
xwiki open source
community
+1
-Fabio