sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: Arwed von Merkatz <v.merkatz AT gmx.net>
- To: SM Discuss <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] Grimoire Team Lead vote
- Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 08:16:46 +0100
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 01:17:05PM -0800, Eric Sandall wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Wed, 15 Mar 2006, Arwed von Merkatz wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 09:42:16AM -0800, Andrew wrote:
> >> I have a question for both candidates.
> >>
> >> What, if anything, are you going to do about getting additional grimoire
> >> gurus? Is this a priority, and if so, where does it rank in comparison
> >> to
> >> other goals?
> >
> > It is a priority, as we definitely don't have enough developers to
> > maintain 4000+ spells in detail. The result of this is that what gets
> > maintained is a) the popular stuff and b) the niche stuff that one of
> > our developers uses. Overall spell quality has improved a lot over the
> > last two years, but there's obviously still a long way to go.
> > One of the main reasons (besides apparently perforce) that drives off
> > potential developers is that the grimoire is big, and the sections are
> > big. We need to advertise that becoming the maintainer of one spell - or
> > a couple of spells - is a perfectly valid and welcome option for new
> > contributors.
> > What's most important to get new developers is of course getting new
> > users. For that we need to continue improving the quality of the
> > grimoires so that new users don't get put off because their favorite
> > software fails to cast. Thus, improving the quality with the developer
> > manpower we have now has higher priority than looking for new developers
> > for me, except for the above suggestion.
>
> Does this mean advertising General Gurus more or trying to get new
> developers to commit to maintaining something (section, spell, or
> group of spells)?
The latter. What I'd like to see is more developers joining to maintain
specific spells. They'll have the normal grimoire guru access of course,
so they could work on other areas too. Overall every grimoire guru
should have some spells he commits to maintaining officially, most of
our current general gurus have those already, just not made official.
--
Arwed v. Merkatz Source Mage GNU/Linux developer
http://www.sourcemage.org
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Grimoire Team Lead vote
, (continued)
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Eric Sandall, 03/09/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Jeremy Blosser (emrys), 03/14/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Grimoire Team Lead vote, Eric Sandall, 03/20/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Jeremy Blosser (emrys), 03/14/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Arwed von Merkatz, 03/14/2006
-
[SM-Discuss] Documentation Efforts was: Re: Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Jason Flatt, 03/15/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Documentation Efforts was: Re: Grimoire Team Lead vote, Eric Sandall, 03/20/2006
-
[SM-Discuss] Documentation Efforts was: Re: Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Jason Flatt, 03/15/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Andrew, 03/15/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Arwed von Merkatz, 03/15/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Grimoire Team Lead vote, Arwed von Merkatz, 03/15/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Eric Sandall, 03/20/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Arwed von Merkatz, 03/21/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Robert Figura, 03/21/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Grimoire Team Lead vote, Andrew, 03/21/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Robert Figura, 03/21/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Arwed von Merkatz, 03/21/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Arwed von Merkatz, 03/15/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Grimoire Team Lead vote, Jeremy Blosser (emrys), 03/17/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Seth Woolley, 03/13/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Mathieu L., 03/14/2006
-
[SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement was: Re: Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Seth Woolley, 03/14/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement was: Re: Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Jeremy Blosser (emrys), 03/14/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement was: Re: Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Seth Woolley, 03/14/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement was: Re: Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Pieter Lenaerts, 03/15/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement was: Re: Grimoire Team Lead vote, Arwed von Merkatz, 03/15/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement was: Re: Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Pieter Lenaerts, 03/15/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement was: Re: Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Seth Woolley, 03/14/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement was: Re: Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Jeremy Blosser (emrys), 03/14/2006
-
[SM-Discuss] SCM perforce replacement was: Re: Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Seth Woolley, 03/14/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Mathieu L., 03/14/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Grimoire Team Lead vote,
Eric Sandall, 03/09/2006
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.