Re: [Opensync-devel] Fixing the OpenSync core development BUS factor

[Graham C. <g+o...@co...>]

On Monday 19 October 2009 17:29:24 Daniel Gollub wrote:
> So how should we solve the problem?
> Should i declare OpenSync as dead? Or should i stop mainting the project
> and hand it over to someone else? If anyone thinks this would help ...
> please let me and the others know. Currently I'm certianly not the best
> choices as a maintainer due to the lack of time i can spent on this
> project. But maybe i still have some understanding how OpenSync in detail
> works, which could be very valuable to finally complete this project ...

If someone with more time wants to aim to take over that might (or might not) 
be a good idea.  But not until they have gathered experience and support by 
making major contributions.  So I don't see any challengers for your position 
for quite a while :-)

> Are there any volunteers for following components?

I wonder if we are going about this the wrong way?  It is extremely logical to 
get the core working properly before worrying about the plugins.  But it 
doesn't seem to be working in motivating developers.  

I think part of the problem is that while the format plugins (in particular) 
are broken, no one can use the code they are working on.  I find I am more 
motivated to work on the engine if I am solving problems which allow me to 
make progress with my personal goals, and my personal usage.

How about, now that the engine API is **reasonably** stable, we concentrate on 
getting the plugins to work.  Solve some problems like timezones, 
recurrences, conversions, etc. and get basic sync working for both contacts 
and events (at least).  Don't even worry about merge/demerge for the moment.  
That would give us something which, while not releasable to end users, would 
at least allow the developers to start using it in their daily lives.  The 
developers would then start to hit the remaining engine problems 
(capabilities, timeouts, IPC deadlocks, conversion paths, mapping, etc.) and 
would be more motivated to work on them.

Of course, the danger is that developers do not try to fix the engine problems 
if things are working "well enough" for them.  But that can't be worse than 
the current situation where no progress is happening at all.  And it would 
encourage new developers -- I don't see how we are going to get new people to 
join when things are as theoretical as they are now: people want to be able 
to try things.

Just an idea -- what do others think?

Graham