[haiku-development] Re: About System

  • From: Stephan Assmus <superstippi@xxxxxx>
  • To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 13:43:41 +0200

Ingo Weinhold wrote:
> I would simply split the developers group into three sections: "current 
> maintainers" (everyone with commit access who's not is the second group), 
> "past maintainers" (everyone who has or had commit access, but hasn't 
> been active for x months/y years (or since the previous release)), "code 
> contributors" (people who sent patches). An analogous grouping could be 
> done for the non-development-related contributors. All groups would be 
> ordered alphabetically by last name (as it was).

When trying to implement this, I found it is too complicated. The absolute 
majority of contributions are direct or indirect patches (indirect for 
example when someones codes was integrated by some maintainer). Very few 
people have contributed in other ways (like many bug reports or creating 
icons). Therefor I found the following to work quite well:

Current Maintainers:
 ...

Past Maintainers:
 ...

Website, Marketing & Documentation:
 ...

Contributors:
 ...

This way the lists are giving the information who is currently maintaining 
Haiku (code *and* website, marketing etc). And past maintainers are given a 
more appropriate mention. Everyone who has contributed in some way, but 
never became consistent enough to become a maintainer with more access 
rights (either website or SVN) is mentioned as a Contributor. One problem I 
see with this is that some people provide consistent help with bug reports, 
like Diver, John Drinkwater, Scott, Andreas Färber and some more. There 
could be a separate list for them to honor the consistency with which they 
help the project. What do you guys think about a separate "QA" list? Any 
other input?

Best regards,
-Stephan

Other related posts: