jehan at zemarmot.net
jehan at zemarmot.net
Mon Jul 25 14:24:54 UTC 2011
On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 15:17:46 +0100, Dave Cridland <dave at cridland.net>
> I've been asked today for someone I can recommend for consultancy,
> again. As usual, my first step was to think of people I know whose
> skills fit, and who might be available, and it got me thinking...
> 1) We have lists for clients, servers, and libraries - should we have
> one for consultants, too?
I think that's a pretty good idea.
> 2) If we did, should this list be restricted to members who are
> available for consultancy? (A perk of membership, if you like).
Even though it feels nice to have an "advantage" as a member, I don't
think that's a good idea. For several reasons, first because I don't
think people should be XSF member to be good (as well as being XSF
member does not make you automatically the best in XMPP field). Second
because that's not fair. People may not have the time, the desire or
else to participate to XSF, that does not make them "second rank"
developpers/consultant. And finally because we already have ghost
members who submit to the XSF for reason I don't know (the prestige? To
feel recognized? Because they thought the internal organization was
different?), so let's not add ghost members who come just to be in the
consultancy list (even if they vote, as you know that my view on
membership is that we should not be "just" voters but actual
But obviously XSF members could be highlighted differently in this
list, to give details for instance into their participation in the XSF
(something like the membership submission page, but more "permanent").
> 3) Or, should we have a directory of members, which could list people
> as consultants, provide links to businesses and projects, as well as
> providing contact details for members?
Yes the list could be broader. But a big list means it may be hard to
manage. And I don't think that assigning someone to maintaining this
list manually is the best method (especially if a lot of people submit).
Ideally that could be more an automatic system (but validated by humans
to avoid spam and irrelevant submission) where people and businesses
would have a form to fill to give their details. And this list would
require these people and businesses to refresh it regularly (every 6
months?), even though it may be just to give the same contents. If they
fail to do so, the list item is erased.
This way the list should keep pretty up to date, half managed, half
> (FWIW, this was also partly sparked by my realisation that although
> I've an XSF group in my roster, it has only 35 people in, instead of
Overall, that's a good idea. :-)
More information about the Members