This group is locked. No changes can be made to the group while it is locked.
Re: "Pseudo-DIA" between the Linux Kernel Development Community and its Users - 1/5 Introductory response
That is a good summary of what the Pseudo-DIA intends to do.
This is where I initially hit a dead-end. Basically you asked whether the
Taking the term literally, in the "Development Interface Agreement", I wasn't
Using competence management as an example wasn't very illuminating. OfOkay. Let us look out for a better example, in progress of the refinement of the actual break-down of activities.
Of course, the development process involves a number of supporting processes and management process, and also that needs to be considered as part of the interface; although handling them could look rather degenerated.
E.g., project management needs to make sure that enough developers are available to develop a kernel feature X.
If feature X is available in the kernel, then no project management is required for the implementation.
If feature X is missing, the user's project management needs to take care to develop it, and then provide it with sufficient quality to the community.
(Hence, the individual developers (initially planned by the project manager) become part of the community by that contribution and need to follow the community rules.)
It really boils down to what you already stated, there is no project management (according to the definition of ensuring sufficient developers for feature X) within the kernel community itself. It is the user that ensures and drives that feature.
Is that a better example?
Otherwise, I also have the "Coding style&guideline" example...
I'm going to start with a couple of observations and see where that leads us.I am ready for reading and writing.