On 11/05/2013 janI wrote:
On 11 May 2013 01:20, Rob Weir wrote:
It took less than a day, and these numbers are already being used on
Lwn.net ...
There is an art to working on a high-profile project that is monitored
closely by detractors, and part of it is not to quote statistics
unless you are sure they are meaningful.
It cannot be correct, that we cannot discuss facts in here....this mail
thread have in my opinion had a good giving discussion, which I dont think
we would have had without the initial mail (I have tried to start exactly
this discussion before).
We chose to respect the Apache Way and hold all our discussions in
public: all project planning is done on this public list. This is a big
challenge. We have no other channels, so any discussions on how to
attract new developers and any supporting figures that can help that
kind of discussions belong necessarily here.
On the other side, people who've been around for a while know (and now
Jan knows too!) that numbers that may be functional to support certain
claims will be selectively taken and republished without any kind of
disclaimers or analysis. This happens and will continue to happen, and
if people cannot find figures on this list they will make them up, or
hand-wave, or whatever.
Just for the record, the number files do have a disclaimer
Everything on Jan's side is OK. Just keep in mind that not everybody is
nice and polite, or willing to get/distribute complete information.
So, more than the numbers themselves (all numbers have problems,
especially when analyzing commits and doing that over different periods
of time), let's keep the good discussion on how we can make contributing
easier for newcomers and occasional contributors. We will always need it.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
