Re: list of contributors [rethought]

Hi! > > > Just back from my easter holidays > > Well, I hope you had a good break ;) Yes! -- much 02, less smoking and less coffee;-) > >> 4. We cannot list every contributor on the frontpage, there > >> is not enough space for it. > > > > We will have a frontpage with some names on, those are editors in > classical > > sense and active contributors? right? Qouting Erica Douglass > > (http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=phpdoc&m=105199882513272&w=2): > > Well, it is not completely clear whether we will have names on the > frontpage or not. It seemes to go on the way to *not* have this, but > then several other comments came in, and now we are again at the middle > of this I think ;) > > > Am I right only two persons, Goba and Philip nomintated themself? > > As far as I have seen. What about you? ;)) Take this mail as my nomination: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=phpdoc&m=105213901328720&w=2 This is not very clear, I think it was too early in the morning after my holidays ;-) > > The rest of the mails was mainly dealing with the process how to list > > contributors? > > All the mails dealt with that :) > > >>So my conclusions are: > >> [...] > > > > I like this ideas and I want to make a proposal: > > proper grouping definitions, we already have: > > (A) technical conributors > > (B) classical contributors/editors > > (C) note contributors > > (D) consistantly active conributors > > (E) occasional contributors > > (F) retired contributors/"old" authors > > maybe more? especially the distinction between D and E is not very clear > ;-), > > once given such a list I think every whatever contributor is able to put > > > him/herself to the right category? > > I think we should focus on this grouping, provide the list and let the > people > > find their place;-) > > Well, as I have written in my mail sent just some minutes ago, from all > the reactions, it seems to be logical to nominate guys to the categories > first and then see if we have any guys not nominated but would be nice > to be listed. [I don't hide away from you that I think most of you will > get listed anyway somehow :)]. This initial nomination process can also > be *supported by* (but not based on) CVS stats, and probably with > 'phpdoc resume's to throw all the proposals arrived so far for > nomination. This can only be done if we can agree on this initial > nomination process and can put away the wish to build a list with 200 > names with some automation. If we start with the those who definitely > should be credited, then there won't be too many guys left IMHO. > I completly agree with this approach and I think it is a fair process and should guide as towards a decision, regardless of having names on the frontpage or not or whatever place ;-) If we can agree on this initial nomination process (no generated list with automation) - and I think we should- I will give up any restraint and throw in some names, if the people in question balk at nominating themself ;-) As you pointed out several times, I am also pretty sure everyone will get the credits they deserve, because we all are adullts and are able to recognize each others work and contribution without trusting primarily on "numbers" and "stats". So, I vote for starting to add names to categories and then we will see ;-) So far Friedhelm -- -- Friedhelm Betz +++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more http://www.gmx.net +++ Bitte lächeln! Fotogalerie online mit GMX ohne eigene Homepage!