gerard at linuxfromscratch.org
Tue Sep 5 13:17:22 PDT 2000
> On Licensing
I'd go with GPL. I don't see why we would want to use other licenses, but
then again I probably don't know enough about licensing to make up a real
opinion so I'm open for suggestions.
> On Structure
> How should we organize ourselves? Should we use
In what ways can we organize ourselves. Got any idea or view on that one?
> CVS? Who gets write access? Why? How are bug
> reports submitted? Who is responsible for them?
Who write access: not everybody, that'll become too crazy. I'd just say
people who are actually coding something like a backend.
The backend-coders shouldn't get write access to update the LFS-API and
profile. The backend should be written according the current API and profile.
So API/Profile changes should be done by one of the core developers who
currently are me, Bryan and Jesse. I think not too many people should be in
the core team. Don't get me wrong I don't want to create an elite team, it'll
all still be open, but just some kind of hierarchie.
> Who wants to do more than just test the system,
> and develop the profiler, our main frontend,
> backend? How can we divide work between us, while
> still maintaining some sense of order? Who wants
We can divide work best if we create groups. The core group would do the
lowest level things such as maintaining the API, profiles. Of course
everybody contributes to the profile, makes suggestions but that particulair
group makes the final decisisons on it and writes the new profile changes and
commits to CVS.
Then for every kind of backend we can create a subgroup, example:
Each of those groups will get their own dedicated mailinglist so alfs-discuss
won't be flooded (this will be transformed into a generic mailinglist where
we don't discuss specific coding things).
The lists will be of course open, but we need a group leader which will not
be me. I'm not going to actually design a backend or frontend myself. I'll
just lurk on the lists and give my $0.02 from time to time.
Who becomes a leader? I guess the first person to offer coding a new backend
will become the group leader and will be accountable to me as the ALFS
project leader. Kind of how Johan Lenglet is the leader of the LFS traducfr
(french translation) project. He's their group leader and just reports to me
when something needs to be done (like mailinglist archive or whatever).
So in one word: delegation.
> to do the website? After we get something
It would be nice if the website has the same design/layout as the LFS
website. I'll be doing that site so I can maintain consistency between the
two project's websites. Of course, help when you want to help.
> built/working, should anyone from our group
> publicize our efforts? I mean what if some
> reporter wants to talk to someone? Who can write
I don't know if I want to become the PR guy, although I would not mind it at
all. But if there is anybody here who has actual PR experience he/she would
be better suited for the job and I'd gladly let him/her take over. So until
somebody else comes forwards I'll do that.
> the documentation for alfs? What other questions
> should we be asking?
I think the best way to organize ourselves is the following:
I myself will take charge of every sub-project (PR, documentation, etc) until
somebody else offers to take over from me. That way we don't have
unmaintained projects. Though my time's limited so the more I have to do the
slower things go. So that's why I hope there are people who want to spend
some serious time on certains tasks and that way become an alfs-subproject
There is no application required. Just an email saying what you would like to
do will be enough in most cases.
-*- If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem -*-
More information about the alfs-discuss