As a project grows from a single developer to a dedicated group to a large community, what are best practices for setting up the project hierarchy to encourage high quality contributions across all aspects of the project (code, tests, documentation, graphic assets)?

closed as primarily opinion-based by Mnementh, Mast, Victor Stafusa, user38, Madara Uchiha Jun 23 '15 at 21:07

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • What kind of background do you think of - more like a group of volunteers without any connection besides the project who work on it in their spare time, or a project where most people involved might be paid by third parties to work on it? – Michael Schumacher Jun 23 '15 at 20:41
  • I was thinking volunteers at first, but when I come up with examples that reach the final stage they all have at least some people that are paid to support it either by the foundation building the software or a third party. – Andy Jun 23 '15 at 20:43

I'm going to lead you to one of the projects from another question I answered, nodejs.

From their site, they have contributors (and over 300 of them!) as well as a "technical steering committee".

The Node.js project is sponsored by the Node.js Foundation and maintained by individual Collaborators. The Technical Steering Committee (TSC) membership consists of key Collaborators who have demonstrated both technical expertise critical to the ongoing maintenance and evolution of the project and a long term commitment to driving the project and community forward.

Essentially, you could create an "executive" team, with different team leaders to foster certain components of a large project, similar to nodejs.

  • 3
    Only, the "technical committee" on node.js is made up of paid staff members of a single company. They realized it's bad form and are merging back with iojs (As well as adopting a more open form of governance) – Madara Uchiha Jun 23 '15 at 21:09
  • @MadaraUchiha oh. I thought that they were like overseeing the operations, or something like that. – Zizouz212 Jun 23 '15 at 21:21
  • 1
    This does not really answer the question. It just provides an (IMHO rather atypical and somewhat random) example how a commercial company may organize its open source software operation. – Free Radical Aug 7 '15 at 13:18

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.