Subject:
|
Re: Organizing volunteer coders [was: Dear NNTP users]
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sun, 24 Jul 2005 23:34:19 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3419 times
|
| |
|
|
On Sat, Jul 23, 2005 at 09:27:33PM +0000, Suz wrote:
> In lugnet.admin.general, Dan Boger wrote:
> > I think we might be able to find many volunteers that want to help.
> > But requiring someone full-time poses a really big problem, as far
> > as I can tell.
>
> Yes, difficult to find a full-time individual who would be available
> for the duration of any significant (re)development.
>
> Also probably hard to find a part-time manager dedicated enough to
> oversee work done by many. I have received some offers for help. But I
> don't know who would organize them.
From what I understand, OS projects don't always look for a single
person to organize everyone for the whole time - as people lose
interest, others step in. While the larger projects often have a
"visionary" leader (Larry Wall, Linus Torvalds), that's not a
requirement.
> How about using SourceForge to start a clean rebuild of LUGNET's code?
> in Perl. If they used the dev server, (say four programmers), how
> feasible do you think it would be to just build the equivilent of what
> we have here now?
Should be doable. I'd say start with a basic working model (the current
NNTP server, and generic NNTP-to-SMTP and a NNTP-to-HTTP gateways), and
have people write code around that (eventually replacing the generic
components). Allow those four (or however many you want) access to the
server and (VERY important) the authority to make decisions and give
access to the server. Then open the code so that anyone can submit
patches. The main developers could give commit access to people who
they feel need it, and make the really high level decisions...
I think it can be done. And by starting with an already (mostly)
functional server, you could actually shut down the current server, and
have people use the new one while the code's being worked on. Since we
have two servers, one can be the "production" code, and the other would
be the "beta" code. And since the back-end is NNTP based, the two can
easily be kept in sync as far as posts go.
Oh - giving the project access to all the current code might be helpful
- both in ideas on how to write certain portions, or even to "port"
parts of it to the new project.
> > I'm not sure which problem we're trying to solve though -
> > RSS/SMTP/NNTP all serve similar, but different needs.
>
> There's no problem to solve, just discussing.
Right - I meant that the technologies solve different needs. They don't
work the same way, and they're not interchangeable. Just wanted to point
that out. :)
--
Dan Boger
dan@peeron.com
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Organizing volunteer coders
|
| (...) It seems strange to me, to put RSS in the same group as SMTP and NNTP. To me SMTP and NNTP, like HTTP, are data transfer protocols. RSS is on the other hand a data (annotation) format which - at least in principle - can be transferred with any (...) (19 years ago, 28-Jul-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Organizing volunteer coders [was: Dear NNTP users]
|
| (...) Yes, difficult to find a full-time individual who would be available for the duration of any significant (re)development. Also probably hard to find a part-time manager dedicated enough to oversee work done by many. I have received some offers (...) (19 years ago, 23-Jul-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
77 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
