[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] requirements page

From: Ivan Zaigralin
Subject: Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] requirements page
Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 23:41:51 -0800
User-agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.4.38-gnu; KDE/4.14.21; x86_64; ; )

Savannah project has a subjective code review process, whereas submissions are 
rejected based on personal opinions of reviewers. This is highly unusual for a 
general-purpose code hosting service. The vast majority of hosted projects are 
hosted in GitLab and GitHub, which do not evaluate code subjectively. Going 
down the list of popular places, this seems to be the norm. Can you name a 
general-purpose code-hosting service that has more projects than Savannah, and 
allows individual admins to make judgment calls?

Subjective personal evaluations of code makes Savannah very different from the 
vast sea of the gratis code hosting service, just like Savannah's refusal to 
host nonfree software, do Savannah admins agree with that?

The requirements page should definitely list requirements which are very 
different from those in other popular hosting services, do Savannah admins 
agree with that?

Programs submitted to Savannah are required to be "generally useful" and some 
other things for which there is currently no objective test; in other words, 
the programs are required to be good enough in the eyes of individual Savannah 
administrators, do Savannah admins agree with that?

And if so, what exactly is the reason for not mentioning this requirement on 
the following page?

Here's one way to keep things concise:

Non-GNU projects are reviewed by Savannah hackers, who can exercise judgment, 
and are not required to accept every project submission that meets the 
technical requirements listed above.

What do you think?

On Wednesday, March 08, 2017 16:25:15 Assaf Gordon wrote:
> Shortly after you raised the issue, the two pages have been updated
> to include such wording (briefly in 'requirements.php' and longer in
> 'HowToGetYourProjectApprovedQuickly').
> Please visit them and make suggestions if needed.
> >(4) In line with the ideas stated above, I'd like to suggest adding the
> >following paragraph to the bottom of the page
> >
> >
> >
> ><h3>Other Requirements</h3>
> >
> ><p>Savannah is a non-commercial, volunteer-powered project with
> >extremely limited computational resources (such as disk
> >space). Reviewers can exercise judgment, and are not required to
> >accept every project submission that meets the objective technical
> >requirements listed on this page.</p>
> >
> >Optionally, the previous paragraph can be extended to provide more specific
> >guidelines, if the Savannah team deems this to be helpful for the potential
> >submitters:
> >
> ><p>A judgment call can be made with respect to how generally useful the
> >program is, how simplistic it is, whether it is a one-time experiment,
> >etc.</p>
> We've added something a bit more concise. The 'requirements.php' page
> needs to be short and succinct. The 'HowToGetYourProjectApprovedQuickly'
> is where we can elaborate more freely.
> But again, if you have suggestions for improvements, please do send
> them.
> >Optionally, some references can be given to further elucidate the policy.
> The best way to start is to clone the wiki, make improvements and send a
> patch to this mailing list. This will make it easier to discuss concrete
> changes. To get started, please see the "One-off contributions" in
> .
> regards,
>  - assaf

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]