Re: Development model

From: Anand Pillai <abpillai_at_gmail_dot_com>
Date: Wed Nov 10 2004 - 00:58:01 CST

I agree with Fred and his answer matches what I had expected :-). However,
it would be great to have a mechanism which while having paid staff on
the rolls, will also allow contribution from interested non-paid volunteers
across the world, thought it might be limited.

However, I think these are early times to think how a future model will
actually work. Anyway, I just wanted to probe the 'think tank' here (David,
Arthur, Alan, Fred et al) to get their opinion, in case.

Thanks & Best Regards,


On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 22:38:07 -0800, Fred McLain <> wrote:
> > On Nov 10, 2004, at 12:03 AM, Anand Pillai wrote:
> > > My question was not about payments. I will rephrase it as "Do you
> > > expect that the current mode of software development, i.e through
> > > will change if and when the project gets funded by
> > > interested parties"?
> Certainly. If we have a better way to do a developer source repository
> we need to do it, Source Forge has been a huge hindrance with it's
> outages and slow response times. We will need to mirror to it or
> another public site but I doubt we would let SF slow us down again if we
> had funding.
> > I can tell you that *I* will push very strongly to keep the development
> > model open to interested contributors worldwide, not limited to paid
> > staff.
> I'm not sure that is the question here. I don't think anyone has said
> that volunteers are not welcome. The question I see is would a
> successful OVC will have development staff? I believe that the answer
> should, and will be yes.
> We are a group that produces open voting software, not just office
> expenses :)
> -Fred-

Anand B Pillai,
Techical Specialist,
SETLabs, INFOSYS Technologies,
Electronics City,
Hosur Road, Bangalore - 560100.
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
Received on Tue Nov 30 23:17:23 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Nov 30 2004 - 23:17:44 CST