PMC Architecture Meeting 20100414

From ADempiere
Jump to: navigation, search
This Wiki is read-only for reference purposes to avoid broken links.

Date: 2010-04-14
Time: 7AM GMT
Venue: irc #adempiere-team
Support Spreadsheet: Adempiere PMC Architecture
Chat times in GMT-5

Agenda

  • One month of PMC meeting: Are we on the right way? Fast enough?
  • Other items?

Summary

Chat

(02:00:11) CarlosRuiz: Hi
(02:00:40) viola: hi all - german summer time made me crazy... is this architecture now?
(02:01:15) CarlosRuiz: yep
(02:01:46) viola: fine ;-) carlos would you mind providing the transcript of the last meeting?
(02:02:03) CarlosRuiz: there was not meeting
(02:02:38) CarlosRuiz: I just changed the agenda pointing to today page:
(02:02:39) CarlosRuiz: http://www.adempiere.com/index.php/PMC_Architecture_Meeting_20100414
(02:03:41) viola: oh I see - thanks
(02:04:07) viola: I have nothing to add to this agenda
(02:04:59) CarlosRuiz: me neither - I have just a question for you and hengsin
(02:05:08) viola: (OT: ups you can move wiki pages - cool)
(02:05:18) hengsin: hi carlos
(02:05:34) CarlosRuiz: Hi
(02:06:19) viola: which question?
(02:06:29) CarlosRuiz: there is a group of developers from Spain that said me they are interested in finishing the libero smart browser (it's not complete and not integrable into trunk)
(02:06:29) CarlosRuiz: I guess smart browser needs some design work
(02:06:52) CarlosRuiz: so I'm wondering if we can "offer" such service on this meeting (or in another different architectural meeting)
(02:07:07) CarlosRuiz: about reviewing design of things to ease trunk integration
(02:08:13) CarlosRuiz: so, the question is - if you think we can (as architectural group) to offer such kind of "guide" design for some interesting contributions
(02:08:55) hengsin: that should be within the pmc scope but I'm not sure whether it should just involve the architecture group
(02:09:27) hengsin: but I guess it make sense that we should provide our feedbacks from the architecture perspective
(02:09:42) viola: certainly this group should give design guidelines
(02:10:06) viola: but I wonder if we have enough resources
(02:10:58) CarlosRuiz: ok, we can try and see how that works
(02:11:58) CarlosRuiz: not for this meeting - just checking if that offer make sense for you - so we can start with the proposed agenda
(02:12:20) viola: so for #1:
(02:12:47) viola: we agreed upon unplugging unmaintained extensions
(02:13:11) viola: and that these are simply tasks that must be assigned to somebody
(02:13:13) hengsin: yeap, I've yet to find time to finish the html ui part
(02:13:37) viola: question is: who is able to assign tasks to the community?
(02:13:38) red1: count me in if its 'simple'
(02:14:02) red1: do u mean the OSGI adoption?
(02:14:18) CarlosRuiz: :-) assign, I doubt, ask for volunteers, we need to try
(02:14:33) viola: red1: no - simply disabling unused code
(02:14:52) red1: ok.. thats a good task
(02:15:06) viola: ok then carlos will you open a corresponding forum thread?
(02:15:44) red1: perhaps an FR right away.. is there anything to iterate with such an obvious task?
(02:15:55) CarlosRuiz: "who puts the bell the cat"
(02:16:21) viola: hu?
(02:16:36) red1: i guess its to define what is the scope of 'unused code'
(02:16:53) CarlosRuiz: sincerely I prefer somebody else to do that - I'm disappointed with this "community"
(02:16:59) red1: there are many.. does it include small snips highlited by Eclipse?
(02:17:18) viola: red1: we had concrete topics: see http://www.adempiere.com/index.php/PMC_Architecture_Meeting_20100324#Summary
(02:18:09) red1: thanks.. that needs a forum discussion
(02:18:41) CarlosRuiz: indeed - what it needs is volunteers to do the work
(02:19:32) viola: there is the April 1st discussion creeping in here...
(02:20:15) CarlosRuiz: it's not my intention to mix those issues - but we need to realize how little our community really is
(02:20:39) viola: totally agree - we need to concentrate on REAL important tasks
(02:21:12) hengsin: carlos, officially, what kind of support we have for the pmc work ( I means in terms of resources ) ?
(02:22:32) trifon has left the channel (quit: Quit: Leaving).
(02:22:45) viola: that somehow links to the last topic of the agenda: PMC work: Do we do the right things?
(02:22:45) CarlosRuiz: not sure how to answer that question
(02:23:10) red1: allow me.. if i may.. i think its only some private donations but small
(02:23:32) viola: hengsin: take eg me: do I count? - I do only donate very little time
(02:23:52) red1: same here, a footsoldier
(02:24:51) red1: ok i see the steps... about debunking unused stuff.. if u want .. i can rasise a forum thread pasting that steps
(02:25:06) viola: yep thank red1
(02:25:24) red1: can i lambast the teeny weeny community in the process? :D
(02:25:29) red1: guess not
(02:25:43) hengsin: I ask because it is getting tricky to move forward like we do now, i.e we are defining task and targets without knowing what sort of support we will be getting from the community.
(02:26:09) red1: shuld i put in Functional ERP or Developers Forum?
(02:26:26) CarlosRuiz: I'm not concerned for being little, or having small support - just that I think if we find who are the real contributors - then I'll be prone to work just FOR and WITH them, and forget about the rest
(02:26:45) CarlosRuiz: we tend to "think" or promote that we're bigger than we really are
(02:26:57) viola: right
(02:27:10) CarlosRuiz: when asking for support or volunteers - just the same people raise the hands
(02:27:12) hengsin: agree and we need to scope our targets accordingly
(02:27:55) red1: maybe start removing more .. and see if anyone screams
(02:28:32) viola: yep carlos - so we have a small "real" community
(02:28:39) viola: what does that mean?
(02:28:45) hengsin: right now, I'm confuse. I means if we say we want to do a june release and we are behind for some areas, will anyone say like metas provide some resources to help or it wouldn't going to happen ( please ignore the name here, just taken as an e.g ) ?
(02:29:31) CarlosRuiz: I'm not counting with anybody committed
(02:29:43) CarlosRuiz: all of us keep working here as volunteers mostly
(02:30:14) CarlosRuiz: I'm being sponsored partially by ADeV - and mostly by GlobalQSS
(02:30:52) CarlosRuiz: so, my commitment is also subject to the need of selling projects on GlobalQSS
(02:31:02) viola: i thought all volunteers are sponsored by their companies which in turn are implementors
(02:31:18) hengsin: yes, mostly are
(02:31:28) viola: red1 is the exception ;-)
(02:32:39) CarlosRuiz: please also take note that I'm not complaining - just trying to be realistic - all of us need to go out to sell and that have top priority over project commitment
(02:33:12) red1: i am trying not to be the exception
(02:33:26) viola: we have enough community power for the everyday work, for keeping adempiere running (since this is required by the implementors)
(02:33:28) red1: but if there are no jobs.. i just watch TV
(02:33:47) viola: but not for bigger movements that have no immediate added value
(02:33:52) red1: ok i posted in Developers forum
(02:34:23) CarlosRuiz: viola: I think we can do lots of things - just that we're going to do it slowly
(02:34:33) CarlosRuiz: what PMC is bringing is organization, not speed
(02:35:22) red1: yes, order before marching
(02:35:47) hengsin: carlos, I'm thinking maybe we should make this once 2 week instead as none of us is working fulltime on this and pace would be slow
(02:35:49) viola: carlos: PMC obviously was an improvement
(02:36:59) red1: maybe we shuld declare an independence from freedom day
(02:37:45) CarlosRuiz: to speed up we need committed resources, and we cannot count with any (probably just some committed hours from me), so I suppose we need to keep growing the virtue of patience  :-)
(02:38:01) viola: the key question is: How to make the implementors spend more effort for PMC (ie non-project) Adempiere enhancements, isn't it?
(02:38:06) red1: Can hengsin 's suggestion as part of theat virtue?
(02:38:35) red1: maybe keep calling for volunteers?
(02:38:43) viola: should we try to think over how we sell the PMC work to implementors as added value?
(02:39:05) CarlosRuiz: viola: I think we need to reorganize things on community to motivate contributors, and discourage lurkers
(02:39:11) red1: viola: can u give an example of a 'sell'?
(02:39:33) red1: discourage lurkers from what?
(02:39:43) viola: what if we would organize an "Implementors Conference" - asking them for really required enhancements, and then use the synergy
(02:40:03) viola: and certainly make them commit resources afterwards
(02:40:04) red1: yes this is what Carlos proposed in that talk with trifon that day...
(02:40:11) red1: work only for the contributors
(02:40:17) hengsin: viola: that's a good idea
(02:40:26) hengsin: to find the synergy
(02:40:48) red1: that means lurkers cannot get their bugs or FRs?
(02:41:05) hengsin: carlos, make sense to try to organized an online session for wht viola suggest ?
(02:41:09) red1: and we only use them as eyeballs and bouncing boards?
(02:41:26) viola: hmmm
(02:41:47) viola: bugs and small features are different from bigger enhancements
(02:42:37) CarlosRuiz: hengsin: yes, it will be worthy, it will need some organization, I guess the best group to try that is functional - as implementors must be more comfortable on such group
(02:42:40) red1: big enhancements are quite localised.. ZK, OSGI.. FA.. if looking at such
(02:42:59) viola: just thinking.... what about a regular online meeting of "committed implementors"
(02:43:26) red1: who are they? I dont see more than those in these meetings
(02:43:44) viola: (once every two months) as some "steering board" - that would add a value
(02:43:59) CarlosRuiz: red1: I don't want to move this forward as I think it's a community issue - but if you ask me I would start doing a census of contributors
(02:44:18) CarlosRuiz: or census of "committed implementors" as viola called
(02:44:19) interopen: Hi all, i lauch this idea http://www.adempiere.com/index.php/Official_implementors_idea that is related to this discussion and is open to improve it
(02:44:25) red1: yes carlos.. it seems those here are in agreement of that
(02:44:43) viola: whoever commits resources - if he doesn't fulfill the commit, he is no longer invited to the steering board
(02:44:55) CarlosRuiz: we can focus on working FOR and WITH them - but we need first to know who are they - and how much  :-)
(02:45:16) CarlosRuiz: how many
(02:45:36) viola: interopen: ah sorry I wanted to read that but did not yet -
(02:46:01) red1: interopen: ok.. good.. lets take CASE 1.. what if it is 50%
(02:46:16) red1: i mean.. what if the PMC cannot find resources to help with the OSGI?
(02:46:54) red1: and Carlos propose to discourage lurkers.. how does that help?
(02:47:10) CarlosRuiz: how can we make a census? who is going to do it?
(02:47:12) interopen: red1:if there are official implementors there have to be resources
(02:47:42) viola: an official implementor has be pay in terms of resources
(02:47:58) red1: ok.. define Official Implementor
(02:48:01) interopen: red1: lurkers are not supported by Adempiere, officially
(02:48:09) viola: GobalQSS wants to be an official implementor?
(02:48:27) viola: Ok then you have to provide 20 hours per week
(02:48:35) interopen: red1: those who commit continuous resources
(02:48:36) red1: what is the incentive - differentiator? between that and unofficial?
(02:48:51) red1: will unofficial parties get same stuff?
(02:49:02) hengsin: red1: publicity, influence on project direction, just some of tose
(02:49:08) viola: then GlobalQSS can take part in the steering board
(02:49:22) CarlosRuiz: I would discuss incentives with them - first task must be the census
(02:49:28) red1: ok.. publicity.. we can do that.. only contributing parties get listed..
(02:49:35) CarlosRuiz: there can be plenty of incentives - motivations
(02:49:40) red1: and make it hard for others to advertise
(02:49:52) CarlosRuiz: at this moment there are not - lurkers and contributors have the same access to everything
(02:50:06) viola: really? - I think there is only one: Get the ADempiere software to support my project
(02:50:10) hengsin: red1: it is not about hard, it should be intuitive that who is the official contributor
(02:50:19) interopen: red1: also influence to prioritize
(02:50:20) CarlosRuiz: but I would not define incentives - what the first set of defined official implementors define the incentives?
(02:50:41) hengsin: viola: yeah :)
(02:50:48) viola: carlos we need to attract them now
(02:51:01) viola: so we need the incentives now?
(02:51:23) viola: interopen: exactly: Priorization
(02:51:31) interopen: viola: yes now that we have an organize PMC structure
(02:51:48) red1: cant the present Sponsored development way work? if any party puts in something, it gets done better
(02:51:59) hengsin: viola: as far as i know, people are more concern being taken advantage of. most have been in the industry long enough to understand the incentive of a successful open collaboration.
(02:52:26) viola: hengsin sorry I didn't get that
(02:52:28) interopen: red1: we have that now, but there is not continuous commitment on it...
(02:52:51) red1: so how can we make it different this time?
(02:52:54) hengsin: viole: I means some are not participating as much as concern they are just being taken advantage of
(02:53:41) viola: hmm an example
(02:53:53) viola: if carlos wants the smart browser
(02:54:03) viola: and is a lurker (sorry ;-)
(02:54:10) interopen: hengsin: totally agree, the participation is discourage, we need to promote those who participate
(02:54:31) viola: he has no way of getting anybody doing it
(02:54:57) red1: viola i dont get it.. isnt that the case now?
(02:55:11) interopen: red1: i add it in the idea, how to differrenciate at the same time we improve Adempiere
(02:55:14) viola: if he instead if OI (official implementor) - he can bring it into the circle of other OIs
(02:55:24) red1: no one does more.. those that did are due to some sponsoring or payment
(02:55:39) hengsin: viola: lets make a very simple example - I give my people complete the smart browser but I get nothing back then another company give nothing but will take that happyly and compete with me.
(02:55:43) red1: like for me to write .. its because i got a job doing it
(02:56:38) red1: but i cant stop others from benefiting... otherwise i am in the wrong place arent i?
(02:56:56) red1: but i like to understand any other way
(02:57:12) CarlosRuiz: guys, I think we must not start defining the incentives - but the requirements to be part of the steering group
(02:57:31) CarlosRuiz: then, the steering group can define which incentives they want - and we can see if it's feasible
(02:57:42) red1: carlos i like your decentive idea.. can u at least define it more clearly?
(02:58:00) red1: how can we discourage lurkers? in more stronger fashion
(02:58:16) CarlosRuiz: change the question - how can we encourage contributors?
(02:58:24) CarlosRuiz: how can we give them motivation to become contributors?
(02:58:35) hengsin: red1: we dont have to do the negative, we just need to do the positive right
(02:58:46) red1: contributors are 5% of the pool
(02:58:51) red1: or less
(02:58:54) hengsin: like carlos, just focus on what we can do for the contributors, thats it
(02:59:10) red1: ok.. agreed.. what is the real incentive?
(02:59:17) red1: whatever u do, can be taken by the lurker
(02:59:21) viola: carlos i know you want to postpone this, but i have no clue of what kind of incentives you think..
(02:59:51) CarlosRuiz: no, I don't want to postpone it / I think we cannot define the incentives - we can think on some - but probably implementors will propose or need something different
(02:59:54) interopen: viola: that is the point, clearly defined them, vote them and apply them...
(03:00:17) CarlosRuiz: I can mention for example:
(03:00:17) CarlosRuiz: priority on fixing bugs reported by OI
(03:00:27) red1: lets give official implementators automatic 'certifictions'
(03:00:31) CarlosRuiz: design help on things being developed by OI
(03:00:46) viola: please do not beat me: What if we have a closed repository of plugins only for OIs?
(03:00:50) red1: or declare them as the only recognised Implementators to the market
(03:00:53) CarlosRuiz: early access to security issues
(03:01:09) red1: and see to it that they get top deals passing thru
(03:01:09) CarlosRuiz: viola: that's the point
(03:01:14) CarlosRuiz: I would prefer we don't define that
(03:01:17) interopen: carlos: that is something i can add to the OI idea, give them some independent to decide, but there should be limits voted by citizens
(03:01:29) CarlosRuiz: if official implementors ask for that - we can think about and get an agreement
(03:02:03) red1: viola.. not to beat you but seeking for defense of such an idea..
(03:02:15) red1: how can you avoid it been exposed in the end?
(03:02:36) red1: and how will it be of good not been FOSS?
(03:03:03) red1: i would rather corner the market
(03:03:15) red1: or we form some sort of global alliance
(03:03:27) viola: red1 thats it: we would have a "community" and a "enterprise" release of adempiere
(03:03:31) red1: but not impeach on the Information is free principle
(03:03:37) viola: the latter only accessioble for OIs
(03:03:52) viola: and then we are no longer real FOSS
(03:04:03) red1: :D
(03:04:21) CarlosRuiz: viola: personally I don't like the idea, but, official implementors are the people moving this project - I don't mind giving them some preferences if they discuss and agree on that
(03:04:39) viola: carlos ok - I stop that now ;-)
(03:04:44) interopen: viola: we should have always the best release available to promote Adempiere, but Adempiere should only promote OI
(03:04:47) red1: preferences - yes.. but we need a real solid example
(03:05:45) CarlosRuiz: I think we need to know who are they - promote a meeting to discuss the issue WITH them - and take decisions
(03:05:50) viola: just to clarify: I don't like that direction either....
(03:05:53) interopen: Adempiere will be important if is the best truly open ERP out there, but for that we need commitment, and for that we need adempiere commitment with the best contributors
(03:06:10) red1: is also our marketing strategy.. we are drawing Free Lunchers, not Freedom requirements
(03:06:10) viola: yep
(03:06:39) viola: should the first OI meeting be in real world?
(03:06:53) red1: in Dortmund?
(03:07:11) viola: no in malaysia of course
(03:07:32) red1: hm.. i am still awaiting for the funds.. (if u like to know)
(03:07:33) CarlosRuiz: I understand that all of us agree on that (encouraging contributors) - what we haven't agreed is about what is the first step  :-)
(03:07:33) CarlosRuiz: I propose to make a census
(03:07:57) red1: and once some funds are there.. i be proposing inviting u all to Malaysia for that meeting
(03:08:16) red1: but its not my money and there is red tape.. still another 20 miles of it
(03:08:34) viola: nono not us all - the OIs - and they should invest the money
(03:09:01) CarlosRuiz: indeed we could let the implementor "subscribe" to the census giving us a list of their past contributions - and if they can provide some commitment for the future
(03:09:04) red1: free tickets and expenses with project paricipation in the e-govt here can be the incentive
(03:09:11) wariola has left the channel (quit: Remote host closed the connection).
(03:09:16) red1: thats my plan (20 miles to go)
(03:09:22) CarlosRuiz: guys - let's talk first about things we can do now
(03:09:51) red1: ok let me start to remove all advertising ...
(03:10:05) red1: other than our Animal Farmers
(03:10:08) viola: carlos ok - and what would be the "value" of a contribution signed?
(03:11:02) CarlosRuiz: probably we would need some committee to rank contributions - karma points
(03:11:32) red1: and start to protecting the country pages.. does everyone here at least agree? Tired of more red tape :D
(03:11:48) viola: ah all implementors could rank them after all signed - each to-be OI has 100 karma points to give
(03:11:53) red1: i will need handicap karma points :D
(03:11:54) interopen: all: first should be approve an structure for OI, to later apply it, something clear that avoid misunderstanding and non-ending discussions
(03:11:59) CarlosRuiz: we could try to ask people to "subscribe" sending a "resumee" of past contributions - and commitment for future contributions - and after some period the committee rank them - and we have the first group of OI
(03:12:20) red1: shuld this go to the Citzens for voting?
(03:12:24) viola: sounds feasible
(03:12:26) hengsin: "commitment for the future" is more important, I don't think we need to goes deeps into what's the "real value" of their past contributions
(03:12:38) red1: we can incorporate this in the OI page
(03:12:45) viola: but that more complicated
(03:12:50) viola: you have to trust
(03:12:51) red1: and ask Citiizens to vote for OI page
(03:13:19) red1: i think we can setup that list in the OI page right away
(03:13:30) CarlosRuiz: viola: good idea to think - we let the list of contributors distribute a fixed number of karma points and they'll rank without the need of a committee
(03:13:32) red1: then we allow ourselves to edit it
(03:13:34) viola: red1: go ahead
(03:13:38) interopen: Citizens is not our committee?
(03:13:53) red1: no... they re our citizens
(03:14:02) red1: they installed the govt remember?
(03:14:22) red1: and the govt is about to remove them.. sniggers*
(03:14:47) red1: viola: go ahead on OI list?...
(03:14:57) red1: ok i m just the messenger and news reader :D
(03:15:11) viola: red1: yep for me that sounds ok
(03:15:24) red1: interopen: if u re not touching that OI page... i be borrowing it for a minute
(03:16:32) interopen: red1: yes add all ideas to the OI page
(03:16:46) viola: me perception: We all have to think that over, working on the OI page and open the discussion again later
(03:16:53) interopen: red1: sure is yours.. :-)
(03:17:27) red1: one question shuld i list companies or individuals?
(03:17:32) trifon [~trifon@pD95F13FD.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] entered the channel.
(03:17:34) red1: ie.. Carlos Ruiz or GlobalQSS?
(03:17:48) CarlosRuiz: or both
(03:17:49) viola: BTW do we not block QA meeting here?
(03:18:02) red1: viola: i shall caveat it as in progress
(03:18:14) red1: of course u will get some 2012 gama ray bursts
(03:18:23) viola: list entites that can commit resources
(03:18:28) CarlosRuiz: I guess today QA and architecture meetings changed the goal - and they became OI idea discussion (hope Ivan doesn't mind about)
(03:18:35) red1: ok.. will word that
(03:19:00) interopen: viola: carlos: is not a problem for QA just let me the last 10 minutes...
(03:19:03) viola: red1 eg: I can commit myself to some extend, but ObjectCode cannot commit anyone
(03:19:14) red1: noted
(03:19:23) red1: but i can brand your company
(03:19:38) red1: to make it consistent i will name OI as belonging to respective cos
(03:20:07) red1: i will put many names down.. is that ok?
(03:20:19) red1: those that i know to be committing codes and works
(03:20:26) interopen: key for a OI should be continuous commitment...
(03:21:48) hengsin: red1: we should keep it simple here, if viole involvement is personal, we shouldn't list the company name
(03:22:13) red1: ok hengsin
(03:22:17) red1: is yours personal?
(03:22:24) hengsin: no, Idalica
(03:22:49) red1: i am naming *Carlos Ruiz, Global QSS.
(03:22:49) red1: *Low Heng Sin, Idalica Inc.
(03:22:50) red1: *Metas AG
(03:22:50) red1: *Interopen, CianCaro
(03:22:50) red1: *Kai Schaeffer
(03:22:51) red1: *Trifon, Catura AG
(03:22:51) red1: *Victor, e-Evolotion
(03:22:57) hengsin: there's no way I can contribute so much time for zk development without Idalica support :)
(03:23:02) red1: please advice .. my memory is short
(03:23:32) hengsin: Teo Sarca, archipac
(03:23:46) viola: sorry guys I have a real world meeting starting soon
(03:23:52) red1: is mike judd.. needle58 ok?
(03:24:15) red1: teo is freedom fighter now.. left Archipac
(03:24:39) CarlosRuiz: from metas you can mention Norbert, Tobi and Mark
(03:24:46) hengsin: ic, don't know about that but I still saw archipac involvement though
(03:25:01) CarlosRuiz: from arhipac I've seen Cristina and Petruc recently
(03:25:03) hengsin: where is tony from ? he is pretty active
(03:25:17) hengsin: Paul & Steve, Adaxa
(03:25:19) trifon: morning everyone.
(03:25:19) red1: Tony tspc ... adaxa
(03:25:28) red1: tony is his own factory
(03:25:34) trifon: red1, what is your quesion? why do you need persons and company names?
(03:25:38) red1: ok archipac is in again
(03:25:42) CarlosRuiz: Jairah
(03:25:49) red1: yes trifon for Official Implementators
(03:26:06) red1: that will be working together for instead of for lurkers
(03:26:09) viola: so guys i have to leave, if you want me to participate before next wednesday, simply ping by mail
(03:26:15) CarlosRuiz: Colin
(03:26:15) hengsin: is interopen = Ivan ?
(03:26:17) red1: we will figure out incentives for this group only
(03:26:23) CarlosRuiz: viola
(03:26:27) CarlosRuiz: before you go
(03:26:31) hengsin: bye viola
(03:26:34) viola: yep?
(03:26:35) CarlosRuiz: I liked your idea
(03:26:42) CarlosRuiz: maybe with this list redhuan is creating
(03:26:53) interopen: hengsin: yes i am Ivan
(03:26:57) CarlosRuiz: we can give every name of the list 100 points to distribute between the people on the list (or even people out of the list)
(03:27:10) CarlosRuiz: and the group will rank by themselves
(03:27:38) red1: bye viola
(03:27:59) viola: ok - the persons should add their past and future contributions
(03:28:02) CarlosRuiz: so, I would propose that as next step if the list is successfully created
(03:28:04) viola: otherwise eg I would be lost
(03:28:10) red1: i think they can add via their user pages
(03:28:20) viola: ok -
(03:28:21) red1: just link to their names to be more trimmed
(03:28:24) CarlosRuiz: thanks viola
(03:28:30) red1: is mike judd in ?
(03:28:34) viola: my thanks to you!
(03:28:45) viola: bye then
(03:28:54) CarlosRuiz: bye
(03:28:57) hengsin: red1: I guess we can add Mike in
(03:29:01) viola has left the channel.
(03:29:08) red1: ok more names please
(03:29:20) CarlosRuiz: Moyses
(03:29:33) CarlosRuiz: add JoelS also for Idalica
(03:29:38) CarlosRuiz: and JoelH
(03:29:58) red1: as separate or in single line with Heng Sin?
(03:30:06) CarlosRuiz: Dirk (needle58) is helping also
(03:30:06) red1: cos i added Phib/Steve, ADAXA
(03:30:17) hengsin: red1: single line as all are Idalica
(03:30:51) red1: i will add Layda Saylas also
(03:30:57) CarlosRuiz: and there are a couple of names besides trifon on Catura
(03:31:33) CarlosRuiz: Karsten
(03:31:40) red1: but to think it out.. some of those listed cant really commit more time
(03:31:46) red1: they are semi lurkers suffering
(03:31:47) CarlosRuiz: Armen
(03:32:02) CarlosRuiz: Daniel Tamm
(03:32:06) interopen: i see there is quite a list of candidates, so the community is not so small, and if properly rewarded can attract more contributors
(03:32:38) CarlosRuiz: Angelo, Silvano
(03:32:38) CarlosRuiz: Mario, Sussanne
(03:32:44) red1: yes but my point is that half of them cant even come to meetings
(03:32:51) red1: they can only solve own works
(03:33:14) interopen: maybe because they not see any incentive to do it?
(03:33:14) hengsin: red1: why do we need to worry about that now ? lets get it going first
(03:33:21) trifon: idea is to list the one who contribute: code/ wiki, forum
(03:33:41) red1: is bayu in?
(03:33:44) trifon: please add one man who is translating ADempeire wiki into Japanaese: Peanubuke or something.
(03:33:59) hengsin: like for Idalica, it is our internal thing to sort it out how to involve with Adempiere. I means it should the same for most companies
(03:34:08) trifon: you can find his name in the recent changes of the wiki, he is very active but never show in the irc/forums
(03:34:18) hengsin: yes, bayu should be in
(03:34:46) CarlosRuiz: I don't have more names to propose
(03:35:05) red1: ok i will save now and u see
(03:35:24) red1: http://www.adempiere.com/index.php/Official_implementors_idea#Process
(03:35:24) nwessel has left the channel (quit: Quit: nwessel).
(03:36:55) CarlosRuiz: that's something like I expected / like 9 companies and 30 individuals
(03:38:00) CarlosRuiz: I would change the title:
(03:38:00) CarlosRuiz: instead of
(03:38:00) CarlosRuiz: Listing of Official Implementors That Can Commit Resources
(03:38:00) CarlosRuiz: I would say something like
(03:38:00) CarlosRuiz: Initial Census of Contributors (still not ranked) to review possible commitment with Adempiere project
(03:38:00) red1: let me re edit.. i will number them
(03:38:20) red1: isnt that the same? :D
(03:38:23) CarlosRuiz: or "potential commitment"
(03:38:26) red1: in more simple english
(03:38:31) red1: that can..
(03:38:35) red1: that may?
(03:38:50) CarlosRuiz: you say "that can commit resources" - but we don't know if they can  :-)
(03:39:00) red1: so we rank them!
(03:39:04) red1: until they re out
(03:39:12) red1: cos thats our title saying it out
(03:39:17) CarlosRuiz: rank is something tricky
(03:39:19) red1: this is WIP
(03:39:21) interopen: yes, public ones, as may be hidden ones that show with the proper structure....
(03:39:35) red1: also can we put a stub in to say "Incentives"
(03:39:43) red1: thats what this meeting was getting at
(03:40:09) red1: i will just go ahead .. cos we need iteration on incentives to be aloted
(03:40:16) CarlosRuiz: I liked the Jörg's idea - what if we let them rank by themselves - every person listed there have a number of karma points to distribute to others
(03:40:29) red1: i put in sub titles.. that its in progress
(03:40:37) red1: yes i agree..
(03:40:42) red1: u take your own bait
(03:42:39) CarlosRuiz: mecanism can be simple - every person listed there send an e-mail to citizen list (or an e-mail address, whatever) - distributing their 100 points between the names listed
(03:42:58) CarlosRuiz: after all people have distributed the points we start the ranking
(03:43:16) red1: done please refresh
(03:43:19) interopen: Carlos: i can add the idea to the mindmap, but then citizens what they are for? just to approve the idea?
(03:43:52) interopen: Carlos: this last posts makes more sense... involving the citizens list
(03:44:23) CarlosRuiz: to rank - we don't need citizens
(03:44:23) CarlosRuiz: to approve the incentives - probably we'll need them
(03:44:45) interopen: to rank first we need OI
(03:45:22) CarlosRuiz: Ivan - the idea from Jörg is (let's check if we all like it):
(03:45:32) CarlosRuiz: every person listed there have 100 points to distribute between the other names
(03:45:49) CarlosRuiz: we allow every person to distribute the points
(03:45:55) CarlosRuiz: and at the end we have a ranked list
(03:46:09) CarlosRuiz: karma points
(03:46:18) CarlosRuiz: karma points given by the peers
(03:46:28) red1: but how do u tabulate all that?
(03:46:33) red1: its a many to many distro
(03:46:38) interopen: ok, clear to give an initial list of karma points
(03:46:39) CarlosRuiz: I can offer to tabulate
(03:46:46) red1: 100 may be too much
(03:46:49) red1: perhaps 20 pts
(03:47:08) CarlosRuiz: 100 is ok - I can give 50 points to one person and 2 points to another one
(03:47:18) CarlosRuiz: according to how I value their contributions
(03:47:59) CarlosRuiz: indeed we could allow people to give karma points to other people not in the list
(03:48:15) CarlosRuiz: do you like that?
(03:48:59) interopen: should be
(03:49:22) CarlosRuiz: that will be the mechanism to rank the listing
(03:49:22) CarlosRuiz: after that we can schedule a meeting with the top OIs and review possible incentives - and potential commitment from them
(03:49:43) red1: i see
(03:49:59) red1: we are our own best judges
(03:50:13) red1: how many votes do lurkers get?
(03:50:20) red1: give them some punitive points
(03:50:25) red1: 10 pts to give out
(03:50:29) red1: to the OI list :D
(03:50:40) red1: so they re forced to either do the pathetic pointing or not
(03:50:50) CarlosRuiz: red1 - you didn't add Mario and Sussane Calderon
(03:50:50) CarlosRuiz: and on Metas you can name Norbert, Tobi and Mark
(03:51:01) red1: ok will do..
(03:51:33) CarlosRuiz: ok - if you agree on the ranking mechanism and then a meeting - then we can leave Ivan take the last 10 minutes of the QA meeting  :-)
(03:52:17) CarlosRuiz: agree?
(03:52:21) interopen: ok, so we continue to work the idea in the wiki page...