>> Er, how do you figure that? If you're an "open source programmer" then,
>> by definition, you must spent time programming OSS. (Which, technically,
>> would be more than I just did. All I did was write a paragraph or two of
>> documentation...)
> 
> If you're an "open source programmer" then, by definition, you must spent
> time programming OSS, and almost no time writing documentation.

Heh. Yeah, it does seem that way sometimes...

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:

> Well, now you can boast the thing in the Haskell mailing lists and see if they
> continue mocking you. :)

They will.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> I found a minor glitch. I reported it on the bug tracker. It got 
> partially fixed. But then it sat there waiting.
> 
> I downloaded the source code. I compiled it. I modified it. I checked 
> it. I created a patch, and I submitted it. And, on Thursday, my patch 
> was committed to both the STABLE and HEAD branches.
> 
> Woo, me! :-D
> 
> Now I can write on my CV that I have "contributed to an open source 
> project".
> 
> 
> 
> Uh... OK, I admit it. It was a documentation glitch. I wrote a few 
> paragraphs of documentation. I never actually touched any source code. 
> (Although I _did_ read through it to find the information required to 
> write the documentation.)

Well, if you're shooting for a technical writing position, this 
accomplishment becomes highly relevant.

Regards,
John

Post a reply to this message

John VanSickle wrote:

> Well, if you're shooting for a technical writing position, this 
> accomplishment becomes highly relevant.

Agreed.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message