add FISHMAN announcement and README and NEWS according to announcemen…

…t from masatake/draft-ANNOUNCE

Signed-off-by: Reza Jelveh <reza.jelveh@tuhh.de>

FISHMAN

@@ -0,0 +1,174 @@
+Do you think it is acceptable to use this list, ctags-devel
+to use discuss the code at unofficial branch?
+
+About FISHMAN fork of ctags
+======================================================
+
+Masatake YAMATO and Reza Jelveh
+
+I(Masatake YAMATO) am submitting from redhat.com address. However,
+this is just my personal thinking; this message doesn't reflect Fedora
+or somehting related to the company I'm working for.
+
+This is a message for those who are interested in improving
+ctags. Please, visit
+
+       https://github.com/fishman/ctags
+
+if you are.
+
+Background
+------------------------------------------------------
+
+It seems that the original Exuberant Ctags project hosted at
+sourceforge.net is suspended. Darren Hiebert , the maintainer has been
+busy in reallife. See [1] the message from the maintainer.
+
+As the result, patches submitted to the patch tracking system and
+mailing list run at sourceforge.net have not been merged or a long
+time. Furthermore, some interesting forks were started at github and,
+maybe in other places. Transforming ctags to a library is one of
+them[4].
+
+I'm looking for the way to merge these results of efforts into one so
+that I can use the best ctags on the universe. After short research I
+found FISHMAN fork hosted at github is actively developed and popular
+at the site. I decided to contribute to FISHMAN till the original
+project is getting active again. Actually a patch that was submmited
+to the original project but not reviewed yet was merged into FISHMAN
+fork[2][3].
+
+I am not sure if FISHMAN fork is the best place to merge the
+unofficial fruit. However, I need somewhere people who want alive
+ctags implementation can work together. This message is a proposal to
+use FISHMAN fork as such place.
+
+If you are one of such people, please, continue to read this document
+and consider to work on FISHMAN fork.
+
+Consideration
+------------------------------------------------------
+
+* Size of community, especially the number of code reviewer
+
+  One of the problem working on FISHMAN fork is that there is few code
+  reviewer. So I would like to use the original ctags-devel list for
+  discussion the development at FISHMAN fork. We have to make sufre if
+  there is any objection or not.
+
+* Code merging(type aspect)
+
+  Ignoring the diff size, we can categorize existing the patches into
+  4 types.
+
+  1. bug fix of a language parser
+  2. enhancement of a language parser
+  3. bug fix of ctags common part
+  4. enhancement of ctags common part
+
+  We don't have much resource; and don't have conviction the original
+  language maintainers listed at MAINTAINERS approve this fork
+  efforts. If we can find a language maintainer, we can ask the person
+  everything about the language. However, if we cannot find such good
+  person, reviewing the patch takes high cost. So about category 1 and
+  2, we should accept the patch only if a test case for the patch is
+  prepared.  Preparing such test cases may not be difficult(^1). It is
+  nice if a link to a reference of the target language is given as a
+  comment in the patch or changelog.
+
+  About 3, 4. I think we should not depend only on test cases. Much
+  more code reviews are needed. We should merge the patch carefully.
+
+  ^1 I designed and implemented a unit test facility. See Units/README
+  in fishman tree.
+
+* Code merging (origin aspect)
+
+  We can categorize the patches by its origin.
+
+  + pull requests at github
+
+    This happens in github. Ideally speaking, it should be submitted
+    to ctags-devel list so we can expect getting much more
+    reviewers. However, at least for a while we will handle it using
+    the facilities of github.
+
+  + sourceforge.net
+
+    Many patches are submitted. We can cherry-pick them.  If one of us
+    can be a member of the original project, we can use bug tracking
+    or patch tracking system at sourceforge.net. It is nice because we
+    can manage the status of submmited patch well. However, we are not
+    the member. So when cherry-picking, we should record its origin to
+    somewhere carefully. TRACKING file is introduced for such prupose.
+
+    These patches are submitted to the sourceforge.net, a public
+    space. So I think we don't have to care about license issue.
+
+  + patches in GNU/Linux distributions
+
+    In some GNU/Linux distribution, it has its own bug tracking
+    system. Some bugs may be reported to the bug tracking system. I
+    guess some of them are fixed in the distribution own patches. In
+    such case, we should contact the package maintainer of ctags to
+    discuss how can we merge existing patches. I'll contact the person
+    at Fedora.
+
+  + other forks
+
+    I'd like to merge them. However, it is the next step.
+    recruitingsource[5] is one way.  Of course, contributors are
+    welcome.
+
+* Code merging (platform aspect)
+
+  My(Masatake YAMATO) experiences are mostly on GNU/Linux. I don't
+  know other platform. Seriously contributors are needed.
+
+Workflow
+------------------------------------------------------
+TO BE WRITTEN.
+
+If any conflict occurs Jelveh, the founder of the fork is the right
+person to make a decision.
+
+
+Next action
+------------------------------------------------------
+* Posting this message to ctags-devel
+
+* Pulling patches in Exuberant subversion tree
+
+   Most patches are pulled in. See TRACKING in fishman tree.
+
+* Discussing "Workflow"
+
+* Fixing the errors reported by "make test"
+
+* Documentation about this fork
+
+    + Rename current README to README.exuberant.
+
+    + Rename current NEWS to NEWS.exuberant.
+
+    + preparing fishman tree own README. This document can be used as base.
+
+    + preparing fishman tree own NEWS, which explains the difference from the
+      original official source tree.
+
+* Making initial release!
+
+  The name of tarball may need "fishman-" prefix
+  or "-fishman" suffix to be distinguished from
+  a tar ball from Exuberant tree.
+
+Reference
+------------------------------------------------------
+
+[0] https://github.com/fishman/ctags
+[1] http://sourceforge.net/p/ctags/mailman/message/31524274/
+[2] http://sourceforge.net/p/ctags/bugs/341/
+[3] https://github.com/fishman/ctags/commit/30b1c6f7a4bff6a1f88bcdf9eac81073056cb58b
+[4] https://github.com/geany/geany/tree/master/tagmanager/ctags
+[5] http://people.redhat.com/yamato/talks/recruitingsource.pdf
+[6] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2348911/someone-sent-me-to-pull-his-changes-however-i-am-not-able-to-add-my-name-to-th