Re: [Phpgroupware-developers] Project Structure

[David Kelly]

I am 100% in support of this.  This is something that this project has needed 
for a long time now and we are 100% behind it.  Hopefully we can get some 
agreement and some good progress can be made towards the changes that have 
been suggested here.  IMHO, If these changes are implemented, essentially the 
shackles will be off and we will all be able to move ahead with very bright 
prospects for the future of phpgw.  Without these changes in place - I see 
the development of this project continuing to be inhibited and the project 
never truly realising its potential.

Kind regards
-- 
David Kelly
CEO
Zeald Ltd

Massey University - E-Centre
PO Box 102-904
North Shore Mail Centre
Auckland
New Zealand
http://www.zeald.com

On Tue, 13 May 2003 12:08, Dave Hall wrote:
> Hi phpGroupWare contributor,
>
> Several active participants in the project has expressed their concerns in
> relation to how the project is run. After some discussion, we have decided
> to put a proposal to you and the other contributors, for comment. We also
> hope that the "core team" - ceb, jengo, seek3r & skeeter - will participate
> in this discussion and respect the views of the community.
>
> Our primary concern is that the project is run by the "core team", which is
> mostly composed of people who are not currently active in the community. We
> have also been informed that this "core team", must be notified of any
> planned development work and approve such development. We recognise that
> the "core team" are the people who have made major contributions to the
> project in the past, but in our opinions this does not give them the right
> to continue to control the direction of the project and its contributors.
>
> "Core Team" Restructure
> We propose that the "Coordination Team" or CT (formerly know as the "core
> team") is elected for a term of 12 months, by the active contributors to
> the project. The role of these people is to coordinate the project for the
> period they are elected and take
> responsibility for the day to day operation of the project. We feel that
> there should be 7 positions and each has an area of _primary_
> responsibility - these areas being:
>
>     * API
>     * Applications
>     * Support
>     * Internationalisation/Translations
>     * Documentation
>     * Colloboration
>     * Sponsored Development
>
>
> The allocation of areas of responsibility are decided by those elected. In
> addition to these areas of responsibility we feel that the CT, as a group,
> should also be responsible for the following:
>
>     * be available and contactable by the community
>     * furthering the development of phpGroupWare
>     * guide the strategic direction of the project - in consultation with
> all contributors
>     * further collaboration between phpGW and other compatiable projects
>     * encourourage participation in the community
>     * ensure efficient operation of the project infrastructure
>     * administer the sponsored development program
>     * be the contact point for the FSF
>
>
> If a developer is "AWOL" for more than 3 months, their position would be
> declared vacant and a by election conducted to elect a new person their
> position. We acknowledge that all contributors need a break from time to
> time, but they must notify the project of this and make satisfactory
> arrangements for their period of absense.
>
> The Role of the FSF
> As the project would be democratically run we feel that all developers
> should be required to assign copyright to the FSF, not a member of the CT.
> All domains controlled by the project should also be reassigned to the FSF.
> This way the project and its infrastructure is held by the FSF, to ensure
> some continuity between CT changes.
>
> Developers/Contributors
> We also wish to see the title of developer, changed to the more inclusive
> title of contributor. Not every person who currently contributes to the
> project are php gurus - but they still make valuable contributions to the
> project. We would like to see the current "how to become a developer"
> document amended to spell out the criteria for being
> a contributor for each area of the project. All contributors would be
> expected to:
>
>     * be available and contactable
>     * maintain their area of the project
>     * assist others in maintaining their area of the project - within their
> abilities
>
>
> We propose that for the first 3 months of a contributor being added to the
> project that they will be on a "probation period", during which time they
> can participate in discussions, but do not have voting rights. The
> probation period is to protect the project from being stacked by those who
> wish to take over. Also after 1 months of un notified inactivity a
> contributor would lose their voting rights, and have to serve a 3 months
> probabation period on return or after 3 months of inactivity they would
> lose the title of contributor.
>
> Decision Making Processes
> We feel that at the moment there is very little accountability with in the
> project. We would like to see this changed. For example the CT could be
> required to meet once a month, with minutes made publicly available. We
> also feel it is important for discussion on important issues to be held in
> a public forum, where all contributors are encouraged to participate. One
> issue which we feel should involve the community is the db abstraction
> layer - phplib vs PEAR vs ADOdb. A poll of contributors could be conducted
> in the devteam install on phpgroupware.org - with documents outlining the
> pros and cons of each side of the debate being on the wiki.
>
> A proposed change to the API would need to documented on the wiki, with
> contributors would be notified on the developer list of the proposal, and
> given 1-2 weeks to comment on it. The final version of the document would
> then be agreed on. A developer or team of developers would then be assigned
> to the task. The developers will be expected to update the wiki with
> progress on their development.
>
> We also feel that the CT does not have the power to make decisions without
> involving the community. Where possible the community should be the ones
> who make the decisions not the CT.
>
> Development Plans & Reports
> We feel that the CT should produce quarterly development plans and reports
> for the community to review. The reports would outline what is planned in
> the next 3 months and longer term implications of such decisions, and also
> contain a review of the previous report outlining the status of each
> component from the previous period.
>
> Conclusion
> We feel that all active contributors to the project should be the ones who
> control its destiny, not a group of former developers. We think the
> structure outlined above is heading in the right direction, but this is not
> a final proposal - please contribute to it here or on the wiki (see
> http://phpgroupware.org/wiki/restructure ). This is only a draft document,
> we seek your input into the future direction of the project.
>
> We also propose that once accepted that this document is accepted, it will
> form the phpGroupWare project charter.
>
> Thanks for you time and contributions
>
>
> Ralf Becker (aka ralfbecker)
> Bettina Gille (aka ceb)
> Dave Hall (aka skwashd)
> Reiner Jung (aka reinerj)
> Lars Kneschke (aka knecke)