Re: Fair large change to contributors

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 23:44:30 -0500
> Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> wrote:
>
>> On Monday 03 December 2007 23:42, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> O.k. patch is attached, it looks pretty good on my sandbox but will
>>> welcome feedback. The specifics are below:
>>> * Adds Active Contributors
>>> * Adds Occasional Contributors
>>>
>> I'm not sure what reasoning spawned this change, but I would object
>> to it myself, mostly on grounds that the people in those lists have
>> been categorized on significance of their contribution (Major), not
>> frequency of it (Active).
>
> Major is quantitatively more subjective than Active.

It is. But with just active/inactive, you give the same level of
attention to say Heikki or Pavan as you do to someone who sends in a
one-line patch for a README?

One thing that's important though - if we do change this, we need to
recategorise people at the same time. We can't just rename "major" to
"recent" and then move people around at a later time.

>> On a side note, whilst everyone has been discussing reshaping the
>> lists in thier own vision, I think what has been fairly overlooked is
>> the task of shuffling some of our Majors and Others between those two
>> categories (at least I always thought that was an important part when
>> I was maintaining the information, I'm not sure what the current
>> ideas behind the thing are)
>
> My understanding and this is implicit as I was never told so I am
> making a complete assumption here, is that it was Josh Berkus's
> responsibility.

Nope. As long as I can remember it's been Rob who made the changes, and
he then sent them past -core for approval before it was actually put on
the site. Berkus was certainly part of the approval process as a member
of -core, but AFAIK he didn't actuallyi make the changes.

//Magnus