On Tue, 2005-05-03 at 09:02 -0400, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 11:33:36AM +0200, David Gümbel wrote:
So I'd suggest listing anyone who can prove he has contributed to Wine in whatever way - making a donation, having contributed code, whatever - , and let the customers decide whom to select for their particular problem.
Yes, I think being inclusive is better.
However, I also think that we need to pick the rules carefully so we don't set up a bad precedent when half the world will be using Wine :). So here is what I propose:
- The list should be capped to n entries (n=50, 100?)
- It should be kept up to date, and refreshed at least yearly
- Any list has an order by definition, this one should be ranked by how much each company benefits the project.
Notes:
- Rule (1) doesn't mean much now, but it may in the future if we get flooded with requests for listing
- Rule (2) seems everyone agrees with. I suggest a token monetary fee that should go towards hosting the WineHQ site.
I would advise strongly against setting up an implied contract for advertising, by accepting money. I strongly suggest a 'these people claim they can help with Wine' list, unsorted (except by locality or name), and certainly without a 'vote' system.
Folks who are incompetent will soon show this to their clients in their own time, why should Wine mailing list be making a statements about companies to which most will not have had contact as a customer.
Samba has a large support directory, and as has been commented it is probably also easier to support. I suggest dealing with the 'thundering hoards' question if you really get them.
Andrew Bartlett