16 Mar
2010
16 Mar
'10
12:40 p.m.
Hello,
I'm just a basic user who tries to answer some mails from time to time ...
But I'm quite confident in XWiki comitters, contributors, and in SAS
members, to drive the project in the best way for all :) By the way I always
thought xwiki.org and xwiki.com were so much different, that at first I
thought it was talking about a completely different product (which is not
exactly true nor false), so adding some "links" between them seems not to be
a bad idea to me.
BR,
Jeremie
2010/3/15 Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net>
On Dec 16, 2009, at 11:05 AM, Fabio Mancinelli wrote:
that's not an easy thing to do.
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/users
On Dec 4, 2009, at 3:44 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
are
built on top of XWiki could be advertised
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 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
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.
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
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