Ovirt Community - Becoming a maintainer

[Carl Trieloff]

On 09/11/2011 05:16 AM, Doron Fediuck wrote:
> On Sunday 11 September 2011 12:11:27 Itamar Heim wrote:
>> Cc'ing some existing leads for comments
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: project-planning-bounces at ovirt.org
>> [mailto:project-planning-bounces at ovirt.org] On Behalf Of Carl
>>> Trieloff
>>> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 21:47 PM
>>> To: project-planning at ovirt.org; Jim Jagielski
>>> Subject: Ovirt Community - Becoming a maintainer
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> (URL REDACTED - INFO: http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/project-planning/2011-September/000283.html)
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Project-planning mailing list
>>> Project-planning at ovirt.org
>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/project-planning
> 0. Title is missing. I'm guessing it's the same as document name?
>
> 1. There's a combined usage of 'project' and 'sub-project'. I suggest using 'project' to simplify it.
> If you take Apache for example, they host projects, and even real sub-projects (http://db.apache.org/derby/derby_proposal.html)
> they end up being listed as projects (http://projects.apache.org/indexes/alpha.html#D).

done

> 2. The following needs some re-phrasing:
>
> IT is expected however that if you have contributed doc, and are not an expect on code that you
> don’t ack patches for example. You can also be voted into one sub-project and not another based
> on your area of influence, or you could get into them all.
>
> * IT => It
> * doc => a document?
> * and are not an expect =>  and are not an expert?
> - Generally this paragraph begins with one thing, and ends with something completely different.
> I'd think of adding each sentence to a relevant paragraph carrying the same theme / subject.

re-worked, see what you think. (go ahead and edit it directly if needed.)

>
> 3. There are terms that need clarification, or typos. For example: wsdm. Is it VDSM? Something else?

fixed

>
> 4. And probably the most important. This document is _also_ about being a maintainer. But it's
> _also_ about being a (sub-)project contributer (and maybe some more also's);
>
> - Contributing to a sub-project 
> - Adding to the discussions and contributing code
> and there's more contents about giving to the community. This is all relevant
> to project / community membership.
>
> => This document should be spitted into community membership document and
> (sub-)project maintenance. Currently it's a mix of both.
>


Don't we want it mixed? why would we draw a line between the two roles?
having people thinking of community and code together is healthy.

Carl.