[GRASS5] Proposal: RFC 1: Project Steering Committee Guidelines

[Markus Neteler]

Helena Mitasova wrote:

> Markus,
>
> you may want to add some clarification when a proposal is needed to 
> make a change
> (it is partially implied by a section about when vote is needed, but 
> maybe that should be defined somewhere
> at the beginning of the detailed process description - or you can 
> just say "When is the proposal and vote required").
> How the proposal should look like?
> Is a short email to developers list, as we have now enough - I hope 
> it is.


Helena,

I assume that it depends. For example, the design of a new raster
library should be written into
a single document. So far I could check various emails on this topic in
the email list archives
which isn't the right approach for changing an important subsystem in GRASS.
Here I would like to see a single document being worked on (often called
RFC).

I know that this is not culture in the GRASS community, but I would not
mind to see this
for *big* changes. Why is it such a big problem to draft a document on
high impact
software changes? It is the only way to communicate in a transparent way
how new
*big* feature changes could be done.

With all other (smaller) changes it works well via email, I don't see a
need to change things.

>
> Regarding Radim's comments - let us try to follow the suggestions 
> from Markus and Frank modeled
> after other projects to see whether it works for us, we can always 
> change it / modify later


Nothing is set in stone. Currently nothing is set at all (which
hopefully changes a bit).

Markus