how to get started with helping the project [...]

[Eric Rostetter]

Quoting Jim Popovitch <jimpop at yahoo.com>:

> On Thu, 2005-03-03 at 12:46 -0500, Marc Deslauriers wrote:
> > I think if more rigorous guidelines and procedures are what you're
> > looking for, clearly FL is not adequate for your needs and you should be
> > looking elsewhere.
> 
> Is that the image/statement that FL really truly believes in?  If so,
> put it up on the main page of the website.

I refuse to put on the web page "Fedora Legacy does not meet the needs
of Jim Popovitch."

> > Who tests Debian's kernels?
> 
> A pretty well organized community.  Debian.org lists who does what, and
> who is responsible for what.  There is clearly a defined and easily
> identifiable process there.

Debian's community is very large.  Fedora Legacy's community will probably
never be large, due to what function it performs.  I don't think Fedora
Legacy could support a large number of offices and officers like Debian
does.

Having said that, it would be great if we made a list of other "positions"
we'd like to see filled, and get some volunteers to fill them.  Some that
come to mind are:

* Press Contact (or Public Relations)
* Documentation Writer (or Technical Writer)
* Key-Ring Manager (or Key Co-ordinator)
* Mirror Co-ordinator
* Accountant (or Donation Manager, etc)

Right now, the only defined/filled positions we have are:

* Leader (Jesse)
* Package Releasers (Marc, Dominic, Jesse)
* Webmaster (Eric)
* Community (all the rest of you great folks!)

If anyone can think of other positions, please share (via the mailing list).

> > This is a community effort,
> 
> No it's not.  It's what 4 people, maybe 5 that really do stuff?

First off, why can't 4 or 5 people be a community?

Second, I think your statement is a slap in the face to all the other
people who have contributed to the project.

It *IS* a community project, just the community, at this time, is small.

> Shouldn't there be more?  If there is to be more, there needs to be more
> structure and a better documented process, along with accountability.

I think we have tried to document the process as best as we can with the
limited amount of time and people involved.  I think we have fine
accountability.  Yes, we need more people, but we are growing (slowly),
and will no doubt continue to grow as time goes on.

> > if you want more extensive testing, you'll have to do it yourself
> > using your own set of guidelines and procedures.
> 
> Put that on the main website too.

Seems obvious, so I'm not sure it needs to be documented.  For example, it is
true of RHEL and Solaris and Windows, but I doubt you will find it on
the web sites for Red Hat, Sun, or Microsoft.  It is simply assumed.  They
(Red Hat, Sun, Microsoft, Fedora Legacy) do some good faith testing to
try to make sure the product works.  It is up to you (the consumer) to do
additional testing to make sure it works for you and meets your requirements
*before* you put it into production or use.  Remember, no one can test
all possible combinations...

> -Jim P.

-- 
Eric Rostetter