Re: [eclipse.org-architecture-council] Feedback wanted: the Eclipse deve

[Martin Lippert <mlippert@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hey Mike,

sounds good, thanks for the additional details.
Glad to read these examples… :-)

Cheers,
-Martin


> Am 28.09.2015 um 01:47 schrieb Mike Milinkovich <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> 
> Martin, Marcel,
> 
> We are in agreement here. 
> 
> Here is an example of one of the work packages that will be included in the first round:
> With input from the Eclipse PMC, the EMO, and/or selected members of the community, propose a subset of bugs related to the Platform UI that would be appropriate to address from the list found at: https://wiki.eclipse.org/Platform_UI/Plan/4.5/Planning_Bugs . The subset should focus specifically on improving the end user experience for the broader Java developer community. Payment for development deliverables is based on actual hours for accepted committed patches. And here is a second example:
> Reviewing and (when appropriate) committing platform.ui patches and contributions. Payment for review of platform.ui patches and contributions is based on the actual hours spent during the review and commit. 
> Once we get FEEP up and running, adding a bug bounty mechanism will be looked at as well.
> 
> I hope that puts your minds at ease.
> 
> On 27/09/2015 7:35 PM, Marcel Bruch wrote:
>> Hi Mike,
>> 
>> I second Martin’s perception of a potentially heavy-weight process. For some kind of problems analyzing it upfront to make a reasonable estimate is time consuming. Then, if more than one contractor can bid on an work item, it’s an investment that may not pay out. I anticipate that not many individuals or companies will take that burden. How many companies bid for MPC extensions in the past?
>> 
>> In addition, some tasks should rather be a commitment to invest a certain amount of time and open-ended list of items to complete rather than a fixed price IMO. For example, it would be worth to have a dedicate resource that "just fixes bugs 2 days a week“. I don’t know if this model fits FEEP, though.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Marcel
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> Am 26.09.2015 um 14:40 schrieb Martin Lippert <mlippert@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>> 
>>> Hey!
>>> 
>>> I really like the overall idea behind this (EF spending some money to fund development), so I strongly support that effort.
>>> 
>>> The described process looks sound and well thought-out. However, it feels to me a bit heavyweight and tends towards old-fashioned contractor work. The process of sizing the individual items, putting a price tag on them, start some bidding, etc, sounds like a lot of work to get someone to work on those items. But maybe this isn’t as much overhead in practice as it sounds from the description…
>>> 
>>> I feel like I would prefer something more lightweight and trust-based, something like contract a budget of time from good people that we know/trust, that are committers in that area, etc, and use a lightweight agile approach to feed them with work items during that contracted period of time. Would keep the budget rock solid and clear upfront and guarantee at the same time that we get the most and best out of this money.
>>> 
>>> Just my 2 cents…
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Martin
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> Am 23.09.2015 um 20:39 schrieb Mike Milinkovich <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>>> 
>>>> All,
>>>> 
>>>> As has been discussed recently, we are moving forward with funding platform development. We've created a draft document describing an open and transparent process for prioritizing and funding work. The HTML document is live on the site, marked as draft, and we would like your feedback.
>>>> 
>>>> After any revisions we will announce it for public review and comment. Hopefully by the end of the week.
>>>> 
>>>> Please review at: https://www.eclipse.org/contribute/dev_program.php
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks!
> 
> _______________________________________________
> eclipse.org-architecture-council mailing list
> eclipse.org-architecture-council@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-architecture-council
> 
> IMPORTANT: Membership in this list is generated by processes internal to the Eclipse Foundation.  To be permanently removed from this list, you must contact emo@xxxxxxxxxxx to request removal.