Hello
I made a proposal for how we could handle this tricky issue on http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Developer_payment.
I invite you to read it and to comment if you wish :-)
My belief is that it is a decent compromise between all the wishes expressed (well, at least I hope).
I remind you that this is a trial, not a permanent decision.
The plain idea is * that the opportunity is taken to clean up and organise better a couple of pages (such as http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Development_tasks)
* to avoid bureaucracy. **If an editor or the foundation wishes for a task to be done, just ask **If a developer is ready to take care of a matter, just mentions it on development task. If he would be interested by getting in contract, please mentions it on [[development payment proposal]] (or any title you think best)
*to always ensure that this task is welcome by the entire community (please discuss it before on mailing lists or meta)
*to ensure that this task makes consensus amongst the developers (hence the involvment of the developer committee - no task will be paid for, which will go against the general direction set by the developers, or is technically nonsensical)
*to ensure that this task is interesting the foundation (hence, the decision to pay or not for a task will be made by the board)
Refining the proposal is welcome. Otherwise, basically, this is in your hands now. The basic structure is there, use it or do not use it :-)
ant
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Anthere wrote:
The plain idea is
- that the opportunity is taken to clean up and
organise better a couple of pages (such as http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Development_tasks) [...] **If a developer is ready to take care of a matter, just mentions it on development task. If he would be interested by getting in contract, please mentions it on [[development payment proposal]] (or any title you think best)
You have made no mention of MediaZilla, which saddens me a bit. I don't know about others, but personally, I would find a wiki page quite difficult to keep overviewable and organised, which is why I helped install MediaZilla. I think it is easier to prioritise individual items in MediaZilla, or break them up into constituent parts, etc. A developer can express their wish to take care of a particular bug or feature by simply assigning the item to themselves. The board can express their offer to pay for a particular feature or bug by simply adding a keyword (and perhaps leaving a comment with the amount). It can't really get any easier than this.
Timwi
Timwi a écrit:
Anthere wrote:
The plain idea is * that the opportunity is taken to clean up and organise better a couple of pages (such as http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Development_tasks) [...] **If a developer is ready to take care of a matter, just mentions it on development task. If he would be interested by getting in contract, please mentions it on [[development payment proposal]] (or any title you think best)
You have made no mention of MediaZilla, which saddens me a bit. I don't know about others, but personally, I would find a wiki page quite difficult to keep overviewable and organised, which is why I helped install MediaZilla. I think it is easier to prioritise individual items in MediaZilla, or break them up into constituent parts, etc. A developer can express their wish to take care of a particular bug or feature by simply assigning the item to themselves. The board can express their offer to pay for a particular feature or bug by simply adding a keyword (and perhaps leaving a comment with the amount). It can't really get any easier than this.
Timwi
Hu ?
I did not put it in the tasks because I understood it had already been set up. In your mail, you mention BugZilla, not MediaZilla, but I understood it was the same... just a better name :-)
If MediaZilla is already set, it is no more a task to do, if not entirely set, of course, you are free to add it.
Note that in http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Development_tasks#Recent_list_of_tasks.2C_uns..., your name is listed in front of BugZilla.
This is *typically* a task which you would have to explain better. If you want to propose something, you can add it to Development_tasks Proposal (or whatever title you think of) and explain exactly what it is about.
Elian explained to me the difference between Bugzilla and Mediazilla. But I still do not see well where the problem was :-(
Anthere a écrit:
Timwi a écrit:
Anthere wrote:
The plain idea is * that the opportunity is taken to clean up and organise better a couple of pages (such as http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Development_tasks) [...] **If a developer is ready to take care of a matter, just mentions it on development task. If he would be interested by getting in contract, please mentions it on [[development payment proposal]] (or any title you think best)
You have made no mention of MediaZilla, which saddens me a bit. I don't know about others, but personally, I would find a wiki page quite difficult to keep overviewable and organised, which is why I helped install MediaZilla. I think it is easier to prioritise individual items in MediaZilla, or break them up into constituent parts, etc. A developer can express their wish to take care of a particular bug or feature by simply assigning the item to themselves. The board can express their offer to pay for a particular feature or bug by simply adding a keyword (and perhaps leaving a comment with the amount). It can't really get any easier than this.
Timwi
Hu ?
I did not put it in the tasks because I understood it had already been set up. In your mail, you mention BugZilla, not MediaZilla, but I understood it was the same... just a better name :-)
If MediaZilla is already set, it is no more a task to do, if not entirely set, of course, you are free to add it.
Note that in http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Development_tasks#Recent_list_of_tasks.2C_uns..., your name is listed in front of BugZilla.
This is *typically* a task which you would have to explain better. If you want to propose something, you can add it to Development_tasks Proposal (or whatever title you think of) and explain exactly what it is about .
Timwi wrote:
You have made no mention of MediaZilla, which saddens me a bit.
Anthere wrote:
I did not put it in the tasks because I understood it had already been set up.
I think Timwi meant that MediaZilla should be used to organize the developer payments, not that it is a candidate for payment. This means that the a tag is added to bugs or feature requests that tells anyone looking at MediaZilla that a bounty is available, and the developer can choose to accept it by noting this in MediaZilla itself, rather than on the wiki.
Angela.
Angela_ wrote:
Timwi wrote:
You have made no mention of MediaZilla, which saddens me a bit.
Anthere wrote:
I did not put it in the tasks because I understood it had already been set up.
I think Timwi meant that MediaZilla should be used to organize the developer payments, not that it is a candidate for payment. This means that a tag is added to bugs or feature requests that tells anyone looking at MediaZilla that a bounty is available, and the developer can choose to accept it by noting this in MediaZilla itself, rather than on the wiki.
This is entirely correct (i.e. this is what I meant); thank you for clarifying this for me. Sorry I wasn't sufficiently clear about it.
Angela_ a écrit:
Timwi wrote:
You have made no mention of MediaZilla, which saddens me a bit.
Anthere wrote:
I did not put it in the tasks because I understood it had already been set up.
I think Timwi meant that MediaZilla should be used to organize the developer payments, not that it is a candidate for payment. This means that the a tag is added to bugs or feature requests that tells anyone looking at MediaZilla that a bounty is available, and the developer can choose to accept it by noting this in MediaZilla itself, rather than on the wiki.
Angela.
hummmm, okay !
Now, will the developer be also able to note on mediazilla his availabilities, the amount proposed, the time it will take, the amount, etc...
I mean, just putting a tag to say "I will do it" will not be enough.
But either place will be fine.
Anthere wrote:
Now, will the developer be also able to note on mediazilla his availabilities, the amount proposed, the time it will take, the amount, etc...
Of course! Anyone can leave any kind of comment on any bug/item.
(At first I didn't think this was necessary because I thought the Board would dictate the amount of money spent on each item.)
We could also introduce keywords such as:
"payment-offered" (the Board offers a certain sum for this item, but nobody has accepted the offer yet) "payment-requested" (someone would like to fix this bug/code this feature, but not for free) "payment-agreed" (the item is assigned to a developer who has come to an agreement with the Board as to the amount of money paid for completion)
If you wish, we could also enable the (currently disabled) "Status Whiteboard" feature (simply a text box where you can enter some text, e.g. "£30, 21.Okt 2004" or something) which would allow us to note the agreed amount and timeframe for each item (so people wouldn't have to search through the comments if there are many).
I mean, just putting a tag to say "I will do it" will not be enough.
It was enough on LiveJournal, but okay :) I don't think there will be any problem with any of this on MediaZilla.
Timwi
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org