Shouldn't scope and project structure encourage both bottom-up/push and top-down/pull contributions? If someone has ready-made code or things that they really want to do, then they should be able to voluntarily do it and push it out to the project community. Yet, it's probably also good to maintain a "centralized task-list which is part of a greater plan" to help pull the most valuable contributions possible. That way, others can see where they can make the greatest contribution if they don't have anything specific already in mind.I can also imagine that some contributors might find the "integrated, documented, tested, and peer-reviewed" criteria to be too daunting. They might be willing to donate "as-is" code that others might integrate, document, test, etc. A centralized task list lets everyone see the gaps (e.g., financial instruments with no models, untested code, etc. ), determine if there is demand for a contribution, and to contribute in the way they can.
Last edited by Traden4Alpha
on October 7th, 2011, 10:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.