>> Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The explanation is that "Sourceforge for Debian" was of very little > interest for me several months ago, it's only once you suggested me > the idea (it's due to you this item in my project), that I considered > it and thought about the advantages it could bring us.
I'm either missing context or misunderstanding something. "Sourceforge for Debian" was something we discussed (we as in "I said that and you were present") about two years ago in Bourdeaux. Back then we were having a panel where the point at hand was how to keep people informed of what's in the project's todo list so to speak. The idea is that any developer can say "I have some spare time, what can I do?" There are severel todo lists, or kind of, namely the release critical bug list and the WNPP list. But there's more work that just those two things. There are more "subprojects" within the project. Some are real subprojects (apt-whatever, the install thing, the web pages, ...) and some are not real subprojects (wnpp, rc bugs, qa, ...). Some are more than subprojects (Debian Jr., Debian-Med). The point is that some kind of infraestructure is needed to track thigs than need to be done, but in a way that's a) accesible to developers in a *simple* way (~/funky/names is not simple) b) modifiable (with or without ACLs) by others so that people can say "I take this", "This is done", "nope, can't do it". In other words: a project management tool. SourceForge is, to some degree, such a thing. Two years ago SF was in fact the thing that seemed most appropiate for this kind of stuff (free, maintained, tested, most of the functionality is there). -- M. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
