[Gdal-dev] Re: Motion: Pass RFC 9 - GDAL Paid Maintainer Guidelines

Ray Gardener rayg at daylongraphics.com
Mon Jan 15 18:24:44 EST 2007

Frank Warmerdam wrote:
> Frank Warmerdam wrote:
>> Folks,
>> I've made a few adjustments based on various suggestions, and now I'd 
>> like
>> to call for a vote on RFC 9 - GDAL Paid Maintainer Guidelines.
>>   http://www.gdal.org/rfc9_maintainer.html
> +1

fwiw, I just wanted to mention something about RFC 9.

The thing with software development is maintanance and therefore 
experience. I'm not talking about experience in the sense of being 
qualified -- that's a given. What I mean is that, somebody works on an 
area, they're going to increase their experience of it, and that's where 
the long-term value lies. Once you "GDAL-ify" a person, that's valuable. 
And you want to reduce the time it takes to GDAL-ify people whenever 

Responsibility #3 is there, but I'm saying, maybe that should be 
mandatory when doing any source code work. Of course, a lot of devs hate 
writing docs (I even met some who deliberately didn't do it because they 
were trying to make their clients more dependant on them), so you might 
want to qualify based on that metric.


More information about the Gdal-dev mailing list