It is not my interest to keep the number of contributors low. Quite the opposite. I do not think you will find anybody whose work has been ignored.
Nevertheless it is my interest to minimize changes to web2py. I need people to help improve the docs, write tests, test more, make it look sleeker, write killer apps. I am going to resist changes to make web2py different (disclaimer: I have been proven wrong here a few times). I do not know the cases you refer to but as far as web2py is concerned you are a contributors if and only if your contribution is accepted. It has happened before that somebody implemented a needed feature in a way that I did not like. My policy in this case is to use those parts of the contributed solution that I liked, rewrite the rest, and still acknowledge the contributors as the author. Of course this holds as long there is some original work in the contribution and if the proposed feature is included. Let me also give you example of contributions that will not be accepted: 1) anything that breaks backward compatibility. 2) removal of feature 3) anything that substantially increase the complexity of the source code 4) anything that increases the complexity from the point of new users (including cluttering the interface) 5) integration of web2py with other ORMs or other template engines. (You can do it. If there is a barrier to do it we will try to remove those barrier. But we will not take steps to encourage this because it goes against the web2py goal to make it easy to port applications.) Massimo On Jul 18, 4:12 pm, Bottiger <bottig...@gmail.com> wrote: > Having been somewhat experienced in the politics of open source, I > cannot say this is the case. > > I have experienced occasions where useful contributions I have spent > significant time working on ignored by the admins because they wanted > to keep the number of contributors low, or they simply did not like > them. > > A public example of this, as many of you may remember is Con > Kolivas.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Con_Kolivas > > He vastly improved the scheduler for the Linux kernel, but it was not > committed. Instead, a Linux developer incumbent, Ingo Molnar > reimplemented it and merely delegated Con Kolivas to the footnotes. > > Moving development discussion into web2py-developers, which is by one > person's invite only, seems to be moving towards this direction. > > On Jul 18, 1:44 pm, Hans Donner <hans.don...@pobox.com> wrote: > > > Bottiger, > > > "and I planned to for Web2Py but now it is looking more difficult" > > > in fact, it is not: you can still contribute what you want, you can > > still post it here or send it to massimo - please do so. > > Roadmap, or no roadmap; dev group or not. > > > H > > > On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 22:21, Bottiger<bottig...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I can't shake the feeling that I spurred this move. > > > > I might be a newcomer to Web2Py, but I have already sunk some time > > > into studying Web2Py such as finding broken links on the main page and > > > benchmarking the bundled version of flup (which should not be used in > > > a production environment because of GIL) compared to the official flup > > > that has prefork. I have had made code contributions to other open- > > > source projects, and I planned to for Web2Py but now it is looking > > > more difficult. > > > > On Jul 18, 10:34 am, Joe Barnhart <joe.barnh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> I am surprised at this division of groups. Web2py does not have so > > >> much traffic that it is a burden to have all messages in one group. > > >> The intent is *precisely* to exclude people from certain > > >> conversations. There really can be no other reason for setting up a > > >> "developers" group with gated write access. The answer to "certain > > >> comments taken out of context" is more and better communication, not > > >> restricted lists of high priests vs. commoners. > > > >> This strikes me as very heavy-handed and autocratic. This is not a > > >> good sign for our project. You have set the barrier for participation > > >> in web2py very high by this move. Honestly I am very surprised that > > >> anybody (esp. Massimo) thinks this is a good idea. > > > >> Warm regards, > > > >> Joe Barnhart > > > >> On Jul 17, 5:39 pm, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote: > > > >> > One more thing... this is not at all intended to exclude people from > > >> > important conversations. > > > >> > If you feel one way or another you can still bring it up here. > > > >> > It is just that sometime some comments may be taken out of context > > >> > from new users and be interpreted in the wrong way. > > > >> > Let's see how it works out. If you have any suggestion to improve let > > >> > me know. > > > >> > Massimo --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "web2py-users" group. To post to this group, send email to web2py@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to web2py+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/web2py?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
