[Gdal-dev] RFC 9: Paid Maintainer Guidelines

[Frank Warmerdam]

Daniel Morissette wrote:
> Perhaps one comment about the requirement for the maintainer to submit a 
> detailed bi-weekly report on a public list. That sounds a bit annoying 
> for the individual having to disclose his time usage in public without 
> any real benefit for the list members. Would it not be enough to have 
> the maintainer report directly to the supervisor? I think the sponsors 
> and the PSC members are the only people who need to see that report and 
> they could request a copy from the supervisor if/when they need one (or 
> they could be automatically CC'd). The rest of the people on the list 
> don't need to see that information.
> 
> Other than that the RFC looks great to me.

Daniel,

My wish was to make the activities of the maintainer fairly clear to the
PSC and sponsors.  If it was by-request only I doubt it would often get
requested, and no one but the supervisor would really know what is going
on.

At least one report every other week won't add much to the traffic load
on gdal-dev.  Do you think it might be embarrasing or something to disclose
the timesheet?  That people might say "why doesn't it take this person so
to fix such a simple bug?" or something like that?

Best regards,
-- 
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam at pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org