Hi, Dave Neary <dneary@xxxxxxx> writes: > What does the structure buy us? It gives people a point of access to > contact if they have suggestions, bugs, questions. It allows people > who want to get code included to contact someone directly for code > review. I think our policy is to encourage people to use bugzilla and the mailing-lists, and not to contact developers directly. I for one do generally not accepct any private GIMP-related mails. This doesn't mean that I ignore them but in most cases I ask people to use the public channels. I believe that this policy is a good thing. If we ask people to contact developers directly, we rely on these developers being responsive at all times (which they cannot be, they might be busy or on vacation). We would encourage off-list discussions and those bear the risk that imporant ideas are lost because the right people don't hear about them. It also means that these discussions are not archived and generally not accessible by the rest of the crew. > It puts names and faces on the organisation for magazines, articles, > interviews, presentations. Is that desirable? Wouldn't it be nicer if we could show the world that GIMP is a collaborative effort? I agree that we need to communicate better and that in particular the web-site should be improved. But I would rather like to emphasize the team aspect than to put names on the official GIMP site. Sven