On 4 August 2014 19:17, Roman Shaposhnik <r...@apache.org> wrote: > Being perhaps a late comer to this thread (just got back from vacation) > I need to ask: what is the problem we're trying discuss here? > > During my tenure at ASF I've definitely seen non-code contributing > project participants being treat with utmost respect and elected > all the way to PMC membership by some projects. I've also seen > code contributing heavy-hitters being treated like crap by some other > projects. > > Honestly, I don't think this is a function of terminology. > > An orthogonal issue, is that of community health metrics. I tend > to be in the camp that considers them extremely valuable source > of feedback. To that end, there's currently an effort underway > to get some sort of POC in place and let others clearly see the value. > I would be very interested in at least using such a tool, on the projects where I am involved, but also to give a hand if needed
rgds jan I. > > Now that I'm back from my vacation (and a prior 3 weeks of corp. > sprit to OSCON) I honestly expect to have more time to dedicate > to the project. In anybody on this list is interested -- the more the > merrier. ;-) > > Thanks, > Roman. > > On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Pierre Smits <pierre.sm...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Noah, > > > > First of all, and I guess that you are aware of this, the document ‘How > the > > ASF Works’ describes the following roles regarding non-committing > > participants in the communities of the ASF projects: > > > > The *user*: A user is someone that uses our software. > > For the sake of brevity lets accept that this can also be an organisation > > that consumes the work of a project, and is represented by a person. > > > > The description then reads on that these ‘users’ contribute to the Apache > > projects by providing feedback in the form of bug reports and feature > > suggestions. And users participate in the Apache community by helping > > others on mailing lists and support forums. > > > > The *developer* (aka the *contributor*): is a user who contributes to a > > project in the form of code or documentation. They take extra steps to > > participate in a project, are active in the developer mailing list , > > participate in discussions, provide patches, documentation, suggestions, > > and criticism. > > > > Both descriptions use the word ‘contribute’, but the first group of > > participants is regarded as users (not contributors), and the second > group > > does (more or less) the same as the first group (but has this aka > > ‘contributor’ which the first doesn’t have, but is also described as > > ‘user’). > > > > I would say that a user of the work of a project participates in the > > community, because he (or the organisation he represents) consumes the > work > > and has questions thereabouts. Questions like: > > - What is this function we’re talking about? > > - When will the function be released? > > - Where can I find the documentation? > > - Why does this function not work? > > - How should this function work? > > > > And why is that? I would say, because nine out of ten times the second > most > > important work of the project is incomplete, inconclusive, to > complicated, > > to extensive, etc. I am talking about the documentation related to the > code. > > > > Or he might even rant about how shitty the work or the project is. > > > > A contributor is a person who does more than just ask these questions. He > > provides feedback in the user mailing list to such questions, he hold > > presentations on the project and the work of the project, he registers > bug > > reports , he improve documentation or the code base of the project, or > > write books about the work, blogs, tweets, etc, etc. > > > > Nevertheless, without the clear-cut distinction between the two there > will > > always be ambiguity about what a contributor is, and might lead to the > > (perception of) degradation of this participant to second class. As has > > been written about in the past few weeks. > > > > *Measuring contributors* > > When talking about measuring the number of contributors in a community we > > should first clear the definitions. > > > > Based on what a contributor does, one could say that it could be measured > > by whether a participant is subscribed to the dev mailing list and/or the > > equivalent of a JIRA account for registering bugs and patches. As it more > > likely that a contributor will register to the dev mailing list to > > participate there as well or have a Issue Mgt account than somebody who > is > > just using the work. > > > > But that is not totally conclusive, as some contributors can choose to > > operate only in the user mailing list, or hold presentations. Such > > activities doesn’t make them less of a contributor. So something more > needs > > to be done there. Or am I wrong here? > > > > *Measuring community activity (project liveliness)* > > I agree with you that measuring the number of unanswered threads in the > > user mailing list says something about community activity. But, the same > > goes for unanswered threads in the dev mailing list. So that should be > > included as well when trying to have something conclusive to say about > the > > liveliness of a project. > > > > But why exclude trends in influx of new users and new contributors, as > both > > also say something of the liveliness of the community and hence the > > project? The first indicates adoption, the second commitment. > > > > The first aspect (new users) is easy to measure by counting the new user > > mailing list registrations in a period, or even the first posting of a > new > > registrant, or the combination of both. This should be feasible to > achieve. > > Or isn’t it? > > > > The second aspect (new contributors) can be measured by registrations of > > new accounts in the dev mailing list of a project, and/or registration > of a > > JIRA (or equivalent) account. Or even the number of reactions made by > each > > registrant to a thread in the user mailing list. But I suspect that it > also > > needs to be a combination of sorts. Don’t you agree? > > > > Best regards, > > > > Pierre Smits > > > > *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* > > Services & Solutions for Cloud- > > Based Manufacturing, Professional > > Services and Retail & Trade > > http://www.orrtiz.com >
