Project talk:IDempiere Wiki Server

Some thoughts

• Firstly, thank you so much Thomas Bayen for such a fantastic job setting our wiki here up. Kudos to you!
• About no rules, I suggest that there be rules that are sensible and minimal, trusting the right people to do their job in peace and removing poison. For example:
  • Follow general and common etiquette (links..)
  • Uphold meritocracy. We do not patronise you but in order for work to proceed well, if this is not uphold it always end in bad breath. If you talk more than you do, then you are politicking - becoming part of the problem rather than part of the solution.
  • No censorship. Instead we may clean up by moving your important edits to archives. But we will serve minimal 1 week notice for chance to show cause and offer defense.
  • Final say is with the top contributor(s). Benevolent dictatorship is a respected concept. If you cannot cope with this concept, leave.
  • General democracy is allowed and may even follow conventions that wikipedians adopt. Again it is to ensure maximum collaboration among contributors, not maximum flame throwing ego-prowess show-offs.
  • We may hold an Elections for a supreme leader from among the top contributors to officiate formal judgement and authority to pass overriding commands.
  • 'Citizens' are known contributors who have been around the project at least 6 man-month worth of work.
  • Top contributors status are about 5 man-years worth of good code work and at the moment we can think of only three persons (JJ, CR, HS).
  • Top contributors decides on interpretation of internal law or submit to a proper international court of law.

• About interwiki, can you give me an exact sample that can link to resources in our previous work in adempiere.com wiki?
  • Got it thanks for interwiki tip to Carlos in irc chatroom just now [[adempiere:<topic>|<topic>]]
• It be good if you can copy over all the images and templates.

- Red1 04:16, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Red1, I think we must avoid to commit the same mistakes, IMHO:

• We don't need citizens "structure" here - I prefer to stick to your "contributors are priceless" mantra, and that's all, such phrase defines everything about what kind of "citizens" we want here.
• We don't need votations for a supreme leader, that is when you need to cope with a centralized repository and you keep trying to stop garbage from arriving there. In our case we're decentralized, you don't need a vote or ask for permissions to commit to your forked repository, and if you want your code to arrive to somebody's repository, then you must convince him or anyone on his circle of trust to review/accept the contribution. Or, if you don't like that, you can simply claim that your fork is the "official" one and work to make it a followable, that's all, freedom to fork is the highest guarantee of this decentralized environment, and is the main motivator for the "main" repository maintainers to take wise decisions.
• As I said on IRC, in my opinion this wiki must be for functional/technical guidance. We can advice everybody to keep political opinions on their own blogs, or in red1 scream lounge forums (as we chatted some time ago). It means, that we can move parts of this message to red1 forums :-)

--CarlosRuiz 20:20, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

This can be some sort of 'rules' to satisfy the expected usual previous line of questioning, i.e. if someone asked us the question, "Do you have a structure?". Answer: "We re decentralized, star-fish, organic. It is the highest guarantee of freedom, against mistakes of the past that happened with our parent projects.'

'Do you have decision-making process? Answer: 'It is up to that individual owner of his own repo".

'What is this place? Answer: It is some technical information that some of us jointly agree to build in a single place.'

- Red1 00:39, 2 June 2012 (UTC)