On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 07:12:09AM +0530, sankarshan wrote: > On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 5:02 AM, Paul W. Frields <stickster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > In some writing he's been doing lately, Greg DeKoenigsberg has offered > > this definition: A contributor is someone a community actively relies > > upon for help. Someone who makes a regular contribution of some > > number of edits per month would fall into this category, while someone > > who only does one or two changes ever would be less like a contributor > > and more like a casual participant (I think Greg called this role > > "collaborator"). > > What is the upside of bringing on the new term "collaborator" ? Does > it help us look at our participant base with more granularity or, does > it go beyond that ? I don't think the value is in the term, just the differentiation. At the tip of the pyramid are people on whom the community relies for help. The larger group of which that group is a subset is made up of people who make a contribution, but on whom the community is not actively relying. This definition might also have an element of "personally" involved -- i.e. it's not just that the community relies on people doing what Sankarshan does, it's that they rely on Sankarshan himself to do that. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ Where open source multiplies: http://opensource.com _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
