8 Jun
2012
8 Jun
'12
7:07 p.m.
On 8 June 2012 13:38, Darrell Anderson <humanreadable(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
We have a small team. Keeping Trinity moving forward
is a challenge. Yet I believe we have a committed and dedicated team, small or not, and
somehow we keep moving forward.
I don't expect people to give up their day jobs to support Trinity, but I found this
article interesting:
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Independent-software-developers-go-f…
A lot of projects are going that way (monthly donations) for example
Ardour has a full time developer with a 54K goal per year (larger
project though). I wonder if we could setup a monthly pledge project.
I don't know what fund raising ideas we can use.
Selling shirts and coffee cups requires serious overhead and personnel. Yet sometimes I
wonder what we could do to keep Trinity moving at a nice speed.
There are websites that are already setup, that make it relatively
easy to sell stuff for you (like zazzle)
here is the Arch Linux zazzle page: www.zazzle.com/archlinux*
After we release R14.0.0, I'm wondering whether we
could do something similar. Every month or so we release a point release for Trinity that
includes bug fixes and possibly one enhancement request.
So for example, KDE and GNOME are frequently pushing out updates, but
all separately, if gnome-keyring gets an update, bump the version,
push the new package for just gnome-keyring.
Even if we push only two or three bug fixes, this
monthly release would show the project is alive and well. A monthly stablization release
also is great public relations because the various news people publish those press
releases.
A monthly release does not mean a complete overhaul of the mirrors, etc. We would need
only resync those packages that change. At three or four bug resolutions that likely would
mean only a package or two changes.
A monthly stablization release will be much easier to manage after R14 than trying to
backport patches for 3.5.13 because much changed between R14 and 3.5.13. After R14 we
should be quite stable (ABI/API) and monthly bug patches should be easy to coordinate
among packagers.
A monthly or bi-monthly would be good. But I think it should continue
to be based on work by the packagers, who cherry pick patches into a
stable branch from Git. What do you think about that? with a more
stable ABI it should be easier like you said.
Calvin