Comment Why spam? (Score 1) 1
I've just seen that this post that I submitted was labeled as "spam". May I ask why, please?
Submission + - FLOSS 2013: The survey for Open Source contributors 10 years later (libresoft.es)
grex writes: In 2002, the first FLOSS survey was launched. With over 2500 participants, it was the first large survey of Open Source developers around the world and had major impact in the community, academia and politics. 10 years later a group of researchers is replicating this survey in order to see how the community has changed. This time not only developers, but all kind of contributors to Open Source projects are asked to participate. How has the community changed in this last 10 years? Are the views the same? Is its composition and focus similar? These type of questions, among others, are the ones this survey is looking for (so far with over 1,000 respondents).
Comment Re:Errror in blurb (Score 1) 125
You're right. Sorry for the error.
Submission + - How competing companies are jointly building WebKit (bitergia.com)
jgb writes: WebKit is, now that Opera decided to join it the project, in the core of three of the five major web browsers: Apple's Safari, Google's Chromium and Opera. Therefore, WebKit is also a melting pot for many corporate interests, since several competing companies (not only Google and Apple, but also Samsung, RIM, Nokia, Intel and many others) are finding ways of collaborating in the project. All of this makes fascinating the study of how they are contributing to the project. Some weeks ago, an study showed how they were submitting contributions to the code base. Now another one uncovers how they are reviewing those submitted contributions. As expected, most of the reviews during the whole life of the project were done by Apple, with Google as a close second. But things have changed dramatically during the last years. In 2012, Google is a clear first, reviewing about twice as much (50%) as Apple (25%). RIM (7%) and Nokia (5%) are also relevant reviewers. Code review is very important in WebKit development process, with reviewers acting as a sort of gatekeepers, deciding which changes make sense, and when they are conform to the project practices and quality standards. In some sense, review activity reflects the responsibility each company is taking on how WebKit evolves. In some sense, the evolution over time for this activity by the different companies tells the history of how they have been shaping the project.
