On Dienstag 03 Mai 2005 10:53, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
  

And who to include and who not?
      

[..]
  

I can suggest a simple rule to go by, as to whether to include a company
or not. In order to be included, a company has to show that it has
contributed (via it's employees or directly) a non-trivial patch to
wine. We can even limit it to "in the past year". At the moment, I
believe only three companies pass that criteria (CodeWeavers, Lingnu,
and Dimi's company, whose name he has successfully kept secret, for some
reason).
    

I cannot say I am convinced this is a good rule to follow. First of all, 
maybe I got things wrong at wineconf, but I remember something like "anyone 
who wants to be listed there should be" being the last statement I heard in 
the lecture room.

While it seems to me that the selection by code contribution as proposed 
would not be quite feasible (what exactly is a non-trivial patch?), I also 
think that there is a lot more to Wine than just code, starting from 
documentation, including stuff like donations, helping out on wine-users, 
or training (commercial or not) are important, too, and won't directly bring 
any code into the project - which does not make these things less valuable 
IMHO.

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.

That said, I definetly think we could allow code contributors a sentence or 
two of space that describes their area of expertise in Wine (i.e. what part 
they contributed to), as this is certainly valuable information for 
customers, and good advertising for those companies. 


Cheers,



David