Thorsten Scherler wrote:
On Sun, 2005-08-28 at 14:19 +1000, David Crossley wrote:
Thorsten Scherler wrote:
Before you read this reply, please read again my original reply.
Did you read it, ok then go ahead and please be not offended that your
name may not be mentioned here or in the other thread but you actually
contributed to views in any form. That is not my intention. I was
focusing on code for views and the common danger of ignoring threads.
First of all, you will need to try very hard to
be able to offend me. You were not.
:) Cheers for telling me this, that is a relief.
I am lucky that you are know me quite well because you help me from the
beginning.
That is true, but the point I was trying to make about offending people
is that many people do not know us quite so well. We have to be careful
not to offend newcomers. Did you see the recent thread on the infra@
list about netiquette? It asked if there is a problem here in Apache.
The only conclusion I drew from it was that too many of us have formed a
little "group" within the community who know each other well and so
cutting remarks are taken in context of that relationship. These remarks
often alienate newcomers who do not have the background of the older
community members.
I only raised the issue to keep us aware of the potential problem. I
think we all know the intention was not to discredit anyone. But even in
your response you said something about nobody else has committed code.
That is also not true, nor is it important since discussion is an
equally valued part of the community. We need to be careful about
statements that remove the recognition of the community from people who
contribute.
There's no need for you to respond, I know you well enough to see it as
an oversifght. I am raising it as a broader community issue, and I know
you have the thick skin to cope with any percieved criticism - we all
know that we write poor emails sometimes, this is a "community awareness
broadcast". Interestingly, when I wrote the original mail it wasn't
David or myself that I thought may be offended, but some other newer
members of the community who have also contributed to forrest:views -
seems my own mail was a problem in the community sense :-((
..
I agree whole-heartedly with your warning about ignoring
threads and at the same time i am saying that we need to
allow people to particpate in some things and not others.
Yes, I agree but we need to define core components and this core
components should be understood and enhanceable from many active PMC
member. I really do not want to see that we depend on individuals, we
have do depend on the community.
That is as well why I think we should rename whiteboard to incubation.
All components that need more community support should go here. If we
want to follow Stephano's dreamlist we have to be very clear on the
community part of components.
I have no problem renaming the whiteboard. There is sense in your
proposal. I would recomend starting a new thread saying you are going to
do it unless someone objects.
...
If other people helped more with applying patches,
then people like me would be relieved and could help
more with views development. There is one patch
sitting there from a new developer. Who is going to
commit it before i get compelled to jump in?
You are right. That is really a thing that I need working on. Anyway,
like always said, I see views different and by getting into views I
understood that this will change the general parts of the project. That
is why I keep on asking for getting the views integration done.
Just do it (in a branch), I proposed removal of views from whiteboard
immediately after the 0.7 release. You refused, wanting it to stay in
whitebaord, you said it wasn't ready. I had the time then, but not now.
I took that time to build a site using views. That site is now in
production - in my opinion views is stable enough, it is only
implementation details that will change.
Don't wait for me (speaking personally) since I am more keen to simplify
our sitemaps using the locationmap, I think this will make forrest:views
integration easier. However, I don't know when I will be able to do
this, other commitments are in the way right now.
Let me give you an example. The xhtml2 change will force us to rewrite
the same pipes that we need to change for the views core integration!
So will the locationmap work :-(
Another point is the integration of the locationmap. Right now it is set
up but there have to be touched a lot of pipes to really use it, again
that are nearly the same like for views. Knowing this made me ask
everybody to get into views.
I'm sorry, it just doesn't owrk that way. Most of us are not here as a
hobby or a play thing. Most of us use Forrest as part of our jobs. THat
means we have to focus on the parts that are important to our job
function. Get views into trunk (you have my +1 for a long time now) and
it will *force* people to "get into views". With it in whitebaord it
will only get people who have a specific need for views.
I don't have that use case yet, but I know there are a number of use
cases on the horizon that would benefit from views in the future. Get it
in core and I am more likely to move forwards.
In the meantime, any time I find to do none-essential stuff on Forrest
will be refactoring to us the locationmap. That is *my* itch and I will
scratch it now that Tim has made it possible for me to do so - if you
start a branch to integrate views, I'll do the locationmap refactoring
in their too, as you say this makes sense since they touch the same
pipelines.
(agreeing naming conventions is the hold up right now, but that can be
done in the branch before we merge)
I agree entirely. We were actually giving other cases
in support of that. It is a recognised fact that each
area has one or two main developers. It is important that
we all do broaden our focus to assist with other areas.
...
We all have to dive into all core areas of forrest I totally agree. IMO
if somebody start using views that will be pretty obvious to
him/her. ;-)
Get views into core then ;-)
Then we need to finalise it and do the renaming actions
that were discussed. That is the backgound work that
needs to happen before the rest of the project can
really assist with views.
Agreed, but just let us get over it and like Dave used to say "more
code, less talk".
The code is there!
I am talking about views, their background and
concepts since last year, it is all in the archives. I am a wee bit
tiered to constantly repeating myself.
Defining the correct name is nothing to do with talk. It is about making
future communications easier by removing as many possible
misunderstandings as we can. That prevents the need to repeat oneself
because it makes things easier to understand for those without the
background you have.
The naming is extremely important, well chosen names
are very powerful. They can instantaneously convey
the whole concept.
Yes, agreed. I have chosen the names because I thought they will do
that. I failed and need help on that. ;-)
[1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=112276643700001
Re: Defining Views Terminology
Please feel free to propose new naming convention for views and assume
that lazy consensus is in operation from my part. Be sure if I see a
problem or an easier way of doing things that I will speak up.
Please no, we need your input.
Hmm, actually it is all in the archive. Anyway, I will help out where I
can.
[1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=112276643700001
Re: Defining Views Terminology
For me, one of the best things about [1] was that it
started to define all the separate pieces of the puzzle
and helped me to see more of what "views" are about.
However, it is still too clouded.
jeje
ok, I see your point. It is dead easy if you have started once. ;-)
Cool, David, thank you for reviving this thread. I took a long time to
craft that mail to try and bring consensus, I thought it had got lost
and I had wasted my time. Your persistence has, once again, brought it
to the surface [privately wishing I had Davids organisational skills]
Discussions (doco, xhmtl2,...) have to lead to roadmaps and code,
otherwise they follow the motto "nice having talked about it". See
Joachim, David et. al. they would welcome a to do list that they can
follow. Having said this, it is hard to make such lists. ;-)
+1
This brings us right back to where this thread started. Managing the
development process. See the threads linked in my very first reply. We
need to decide how to use Jira to create this ToDo list and then we need
to start actually using it.
Ross
