[Members] Voting criteria

Hal Rottenberg halr9000 at gmail.com
Thu May 12 10:22:19 CDT 2005

> I think either you have misunderstood me or you simply havent thought the
> implications through properly, having "Official JSF Software" where it would
> presumably be restricted to only one of each type of application (i.e. only
> one windows client) might encourage some new developers to contribute to
> that project, but it is very unlikely to foster development on any new
> projects more than at the moment, it is far more likely to stifle any new
> development, it certainly will not foster it, the only way to foster it is
> with a certification program where those developers have a target to work to

I am in support of doing both of these things, not "Official JSF"
_instead of_ certifications.  They are complementary, I believe.

> Sure of course, its fine if anyone has the opportunity to get the badge
> thats fine with me, but in the past the "Official JSF Software" idea has
> always been pushed as only one will ever win, which is where the damage to
> the community comes in.

Naah I don't want just one.  I don't see the past example of the
Apache Foundation as being literally the way we would implement such a
portfolio of software.  I for one would want to make it open to
everyone, create some categories (e.g. client, server, utility,
library, voip whatever) and only give the best and brightest the 'gold
medal'.  I think we wouldn't even give medals out to every category
until we really had a stellar example, such as something with 100%
compliance to the standards, not 98%.
> Yea thats good, IMO certifications is the only really fair way to assign
> honours to clients, they have something specific to work for and everyone is
> held to the same set of rules to get the honour.

Right.  As opposed to "Official JSF", which is more restrictive (and
hence more competitive).
> > And once you have that going, why not measure the popularity of
> > projects (like Sourceforge)?  That would certainly favor the good
> > projects over the bad, and that is a good thing.
> Yup sure, not entirely sure how you would measure the popularity other than
> download counts or surveys tho.

Both have their negatives of course.  For jabberstudio.org hosted
stuff, we could use a formula similar to sf.net's.  One that involves
CVS commits, mailing list activity, frequency of new releases, etc.

Psi webmaster (http://psi-im.org)
im:hal at jabber.rocks.cc

More information about the Members mailing list