It is good to see that we are going to try to make a fresh start (again). While not being personally involved in the recent dissention, it was disheartening to see our community splinter and possibly fork. Perhaps with our new stewards, we will see our community develop:
- a roadmap for the next few minor (and/or major releases) with a tentative timeline
- clear procedures for deciding what will be included in the releases
- clear procedures for how we resolve conflicts amicably
- some sort of rudimentary, minimal organizational structure to update the roadmap, communicate news and issues to the community, and establish some order.
I know there are some that abhor structure. Many would say 'just jump in and do it' when someone in the forums asks why something hasn't been done. The fact is that there are many lurkers in the community that would like to contribute, but don't know what is needed, who decides what, and/or where we are going. The end result with this situation is that they contribute nothing as they don't want their effort wasted if they guess wrong and contribute code, content, or documentation that ends up not being in the next release. I'm not talking about work done outside of the base release (such as contributions, how-to's, etc.). That work is always welcome and appreciated. But there are also those that want to see the base release updated, documented, etc. that feel they are not able to contribute to that effort as they don't know what the plans are. I'm not referring to the SW engineers in the group - they can checkout something from CVS, read it and change or document it. I'm referring to the others in the group that are not SW engineers that would still like to contribute).
We all GREATLY appreciate those that have took it upon themselves to issue the next release (and are working on future releases, contributions). But in a way it is sad that they did this out of frustration(?) rather than as part of a larger group effort. Our collective efforts are stronger if we all move in the same direction, right?
With this in mind, I offer the following proposal for a stripped down organizational structure and constitution. You can find it here
http://no.longer.valid/phpwiki/index.php/Proposed%20Organization I have made a second copy on the wiki for community input/changes. You can find it here:
http://no.longer.valid/phpwiki/index.php/Proposed%20Organization%20ScratchpadMake your changes on this copy! The idea is to freeze the first copy of the document in stages (like a 0.X alpha release) so that the community can reflect on and vote(?) for each revision while the second copy can continue being updated. In this manner, maybe we can work through this process and organize!
I've tried to address issues such as corporate stewards, how the community can influence future development, election procedures, terms of office, etc.
The proposed Debian structure is nice, but IMHO, I think it's too large for our group at this point.
If I've stepped out of line here with this proposal, skip the flames - just ignore it and submit your own ideas. This was my way of 'just doing it' (see above). Hopefully this will lead and/or spur the growth of our community (even if what we adopt is nothing like this proposal).
21 Replies
5401 Views