This turned into a discussion about how the Grouper project handles collaboration. The two projects are very similar and hopefully the following discussion points will help OpenRegistry to grow:
- grouper was collaborative from the start
**2 schools bristol and chicago
**cardiff, penn, duke
**Tom knew he needed this but there were no solutions out there
**Got something written that was missing pieces but was a start
**Penn had their own interests, it wasn't just right
**Penn doesn't typically do Open Source
**technology matched developer skills
**1.6 is stable
**2.0 is next major release
**release twice a year
**roadmap, not formal governance
**conference calls every other week
**Rob at Cardiff wanted to contribute it back
**SVN branches are different versions
**working on 2.0
**fix in 1.5 branch, merge that forward into 1.6 and 2.0 branch
**Trunk is development version
**Trunk changes throughout
**coarse roadmap, point of discussion twice a year
**figure out the target ahead of time, functionally
**if you have a change that might effect people who don't want, put in a switch in the config
***5 committers
***motivated by not forcing people to move large pieces outside the project
**what do deployers want, not what do committers want
***use case driven, motivated by a specific use case
***avoid hypothetical, at least one happy customer
**feature branches? in a minor release
**important that someone consistently handle the merging
**each committer has their own area that they work on
***web services, UI, complex internal API, LDAP, ESB, Documentation
**by and for the community
**Mechanics of adding new users - earn your way on
***feed them some ideas to generate patches
***do it through issue tracking Jira
***attach patch files through Jira
***our committers look at them
***existing committers vote