Code submission turnaround time

Hi all,

I was just wondering how long it typically takes to hear back after sending in a code submission. I sent one getting on for two weeks ago and haven’t heard anything about it so far.

Cheers,

Dave

It depends upon how busy we are. Rest assured, it’s in our queue… :)

To give you an example, I updated my ROOL ToDo list a couple of weeks ago, focussing on the stuff I need to get done by early June. It had around 80 man days of work on it. At best, I reckon I can scrape-together maybe an hour a day. Hopefully that illustrates the problem.

What ROOL really needs is enough cash coming in to simply employ someone full time – we’ve got more than enough work to keep that person busy! I think we’ve pretty much reached the limit of how much we can sub-divide the stuff we already do amongst volunteers; it simply comes down to requiring more time of the available volunteers than they are able to make available.

To add to that last point, I touched on this in my talk at Wakefield – given the amount of money currently coming into ROOL via donations and (slim) profits on merchandise sales, you’d be at least an order of magnitude better paid working for McDonalds on minimum wage. That’s how far away we are at the moment from being able to employ someone. :( Which just means, as RISC OS becomes more popular, ROOL’s collective ToDo list just keeps on growing.

Which just means, as RISC OS becomes more popular, ROOL’s collective ToDo list just keeps on growing.

More volunteers?
Is there stuff on the ToDo list that could be shared around?

The other afternoon I killed some time by writing a Pong game for my little OLED. Retro cool, but not necessarily a particularly productive use of spare time…

Many of the tasks are the sorts of things only I (or the other ROOL guys) are in a position to deal with, for example answering emails, doing the accounts, etc. Other tasks have already been subdivided and dished-out as much as practical.

Our experience has been pretty mixed with pulling in more people to help; it often ends up costing us more time in support – which is not to denigrate the efforts of those helping, more a reflection of the nature of the stuff we’re doing and how interrelated it all is, plus just how much background knowledge you need to lean on in order to get a task done.

I keep re-visiting this topic with the guys in ROOL, trying to find new initiatives for community members to help with in order to lighten our load that aren’t in themselves an administrative quagmire. The answer we keep coming back to is that the only real solution is for the core team to put more time into it, which cannot happen while it remains unpaid work.

Food for thought, certainly!

I don’t think it could be read that way, but to avoid any doubt. None of the following is meant as a criticism of anyone. ROOL and their volunteers are doing a great job. It is the increasing uptake/returning users and programmers to RISC OS that is causing the problems:-)

I can well imagine just how time consuming many of admin and day to day running of ROOL must be and I can see how frustrating it must be for Steve and the other volunteers.
I think many RISC OS users will be able to understand that it is limiting the progress of RISC OS significantly. Having code submissions not dealt with quickly is not going to encourage programmers.

So I suggest a new ‘Facilitator bounty’ to pay Steve or another of the core team to do some of this work.
Once the bounty has reached a worthwhile enough amount for say one or more days paid work it could be claimed. And the bounty reset. (it would be nice if say a running total of paid days work could be kept)

I’m not sure how practical it is for one of the core team to take a day here and a day there from their main work, but I suspect it is doable.

Whilst bounties for specific software can be very useful. I think many RISC OS users can see that paying someone to do the admin and help co-ordinate the volunteers will help RISC OS significantly.

Most of the RISC OS programming that has been added to the CVS over the last year has been done by people who have not sought payment (thanks very much guys) So paying someone to facilitate more of that and the general admin seems to me to be the most efficient way of helping RISC OS progress.

A bit more controversial:
I wonder how many people who have contributed to some of the open bounties would be happy to see some or all of a bounty to be redirected to the ‘Facilitator Bounty’?

‘Facilitator Bounty’ is the best name I could think of, if someone can think of a better one I won’t sulk!

Sorry if this is a bit rambling, words are not my forte!

Some interesting ideas…

One thing I would say (my opinion, anyway) is that we wouldn’t re-allocate cash from the current bounties to some other purpose (specifically for paying ourselves) no matter what the general consensus is – as kind as that offer may be! :) Money put against code improvements should stay against code improvements – it’s intended for developers, not for ROOL – although there’s nothing stopping us from claiming a bounty and doing the coding ourselves, but that wouldn’t help shrink the ToDo list!

I do wonder whether our core community – those who can and do feel inclined to dig into their pockets now and then to support the various bounties – is simply not large enough to also support a paid-for work model, even part-time (look how slowly our bounties accrue donations). Especially when compared to the size of the broader community (those who consume or dabble but don’t contribute in return).

But the point of what ROOL is doing, at its very core, is not to make RISC OS into something people have to pay for, or be made to feel guilty about not donating towards. That’s broadly the opposite of our aim of getting RISC OS from being closed source and commercial. Many users won’t be in a position to contribute and that’s just fine.

It’d just be great if we could find a wealthy benefactor (or three) to help ROOL to invest more time in supporting the community. :D