no edit summary
* Every main goal and database change needs at minimum one developer and one reviewer. We need to avoid situations as with 3.0/3.1 where large code changes where left only partially finished. If the developer drops out, the reviewer can or take over and fix things up, or revert the changes. If there are two developers then it suffices both are also reviewers.
* svn branches for all large changes that requires multiple checking over a period of time during which the code will be broken (eg database changes and large refractoring). It is mainly up to the developers to do this or not, but this should make it clear how main changes can be added to the codebase without disrupting development of other people for a long period (which should be avoided). See commands eg [http://matforge.org/fipy/browser/trunk/documentation/ADMINISTRATA.txt here]. ''Developer to write this policy:'' ?
* Decision on the definition of the different parts of GRAMPS. What do we allow as plugins, views, gramplets, ... ? How do we offer the user a non-confusing image of what GRAMPS is? This starts in version 3.1 with not distributing some parts of GRAMPS that are present in the subversion repository. ''Developer to write this policy:'' bmcage
* Decision on a tool for adding API documentation to GRAMPS source code. The aim would be to work out the infrastructure to make this possible, and guidelines to the GRAMPS developers. Note that GRAMPS contains some support already, but as since the last version nobody seems to bother this means the present guidelines are or not known, or the syntax not liked, or ... See [http://www.gramps-project.org/bugs/view.php?id=2691 feature request]. ''Developer to write this policy:'' ?