cool. This discussion needs some resolving though.
I'm all for the creation of another 15 lists. With all the cross-posting, subject-meta, gmail, stats, my-left-arm-is-longer-than-my-right arguments, my vote is still with the split. best-practices, architecture, components, unit-testing, deployment, flash-flex, remote services, java-flex architectures, design ux, announcements, etc.. lets do it. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel Freiman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think of "Best Practices" and "Architecture/Concepts" as separate but > overlapping categories so I guess that's why I thought no one else brought > it up. > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 11:57 PM, Bjorn Schultheiss < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Also, to Bjorn, that's a point I hadn't thought of. The idea of > > having an > > > arch/concepts list might be interesting. The two questions I would have > > > would be: 1) would the questions on this list have any connection to > > Flex > > > > Anatole mentioned it earlier in a 'Best Practices' list. > > > > For example at MAX thy had that Best Practices panel and some > > interesting topics were brought up and discussed. > > > > From my point of view I'm always learning. > > It would be an interesting read for me. > > > > > > --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com <flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com>, "Daniel > > Freiman" <FreimanCQ@> wrote: > > > > > > I agree that a FAQ seems like a good idea no matter what. Is anyone > > against > > > this idea independent of the argument of whether or not to split the > > list? > > > > > > As far as splitting lists, I still think if people want to propose > > potential > > > new lists, they need to be much more explicit about what the list > > will be > > > for. I'll take the "enterprise" example. Let's assume for a second > > it has > > > only one correct meaning (which is an assumption I agree with, but many > > > people disagree with me on that). "Enterprise" has become a > > buzzword with > > > many different commonly understood meanings, and most of those > > meanings are > > > vague. There's no way for everyone on the list to be sure that we're > > > talking about the same thing unless someone explicitly spells out > > what we > > > are talking about (I'm not going to because I'm against having a > > > "enterprise" list given every way I know to interpret the word). > > And if we > > > don't have a common understanding of the proposal we can't efficiently > > > criticize/support/amend the proposal. I'm not saying there has to > > be a fine > > > line separating the lists, but it should at least be a fuzzy line. > > > > > > Also, to Bjorn, that's a point I hadn't thought of. The idea of > > having an > > > arch/concepts list might be interesting. The two questions I would have > > > would be: 1) would the questions on this list have any connection to > > Flex > > > other than the fact that the users code in Flex (I think it probably > > would) > > > or would it just be piggybacking on the user base; 2) Will it avoid > > > stratification of the user base (i.e. will it be practically > > accessible to > > > users of all skill levels)? > > > > > > Lastly, I'm going to reiterate my opinion that we shouldn't separate the > > > lists based on skill/level difficulty. The distinction is too fuzzy > > (Too > > > much cross-posting and too much posting to the wrong list). > > Sometimes you > > > don't know if you're question is advanced or not until you get the > > answer. > > > I've had a few times where I've asked what I thought was a simple > > question > > > and the response from Gordon was "I talked to a guy on the player > > team..." > > > If a question has a one line answer it can't be complex...unless the one > > > line required going through the player or compiler code to understand it > > > (sorry for the overstatement). > > > > > > - Daniel Freiman > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 10:31 PM, Douglas Knudsen <douglasknudsen@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Having been on this list since 2004, yeah back when the Iteration > > > > folks were not Adobe Robe Wearers yet, I've seen this discussion come > > > > up a few times. I've asked for a associated FAQ a few times, but > > > > there was no interest from the Iteration folks on this or splitting up > > > > things, no offense Alistair or Stephen you more than rocked with > > > > helping this community. I'd certainly agree to a good FAQ be made > > > > available and sent to the list monthly for all to be reminded and have > > > > it linked at the footer. > > > > > > > > Bjorn has a good point later in this thread about the idea that > > > > answers are terse due to volume. > > > > > > > > Matt, I do agree with your #1, but #2 and #3 sounds too much like list > > > > mommies or invitations for list mommies. Something quite uncommon to > > > > the best of my recollection on flexcoders is the real need for list > > > > mommies. > > > > > > > > I'm in Anatole's camp on this, having multiple lists could be > > > > beneficial to all as well as the community. Do we know this for a > > > > fact? Nope, my crystal ball isn't helping, but it has with many other > > > > topics in the past. Conversely it may have hindered others, but > > > > perhaps because the introduction of split lists was premature, who > > > > knows. Hey, there are already multiple lists, besides flexcomponents > > > > there is HOF_Flex for one and the India based list too, I'm sure there > > > > are others. > > > > > > > > I suggest we start off with a couple very generic variants. > > > > flexcoders_enterprise seems ok to me, those that work with enterprise > > > > tools would find it obvious. leave flexcoders as is, add in a > > > > designer centric list, and a advanced list and go from there, revisit > > > > in a few months to see how it went. > > > > > > > > Oh, BTW< there are other email readers that do threaded tricks like > > > > GMail...though I don't use them. :) > > > > > > > > DK > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 1:48 PM, Matt Chotin > > <mchotin@<mchotin%40adobe.com>> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > Hey folks, let's calm down a little here, K? > > > > > > > > > > Alright, based on what I've been seeing people say, here's my > > suggestion. > > > > > > > > > > 1) Let's get an FAQ going that can be edited by moderators or > > members of > > > > the > > > > > community. This will be about common problems that folks run > > into. One > > > > > suggestion of course from me would be that we use the Cookbook for > > > > "how-to" > > > > > type questions. But for things that don't seem like they're cookbook > > > > > appropriate, we can put them in the FAQ. I like the idea of > > doing it in > > > > > Buzzword, though Buzzword docs won't come up in Google. > > Long-term I think > > > > > the right place might be in whatever we set up in the Adobe > > Developer > > > > > Center. But for now how about we just allocate a page off of the > > > > opensource > > > > > wiki. We can pick some moderators who can edit the page and I > > will get > > > > them > > > > > added so they can take care of it. We can also add the link to > > the FAQ to > > > > > the bottom of every email. > > > > > > > > > > 2) Some folks suggested that you either mark in the body or in the > > > > subject > > > > > something that indicates what you're talking about. Seems > > reasonable. We > > > > > could use some of the topics that were being suggested. [UX], > > > > [Enterprise], > > > > > [Data Services] [Announce], etc. We don't need to limit this, but by > > > > > following a convention of placing the general area of > > discussion, folks > > > > will > > > > > know if they're going to be capable of getting involved in the > > thread. > > > > The > > > > > more people follow this convention, the more efficient it will > > become. > > > > > > > > > > 3) We can get aggressive on the moderation. Rather than just > > scanning for > > > > > spam, moderators can actually look at the posts by new users and > > decide > > > > if > > > > > they meet the general criteria for asking a question. If they > > don't, the > > > > > moderator can reject the post and point the user to the forum > > FAQ which > > > > has > > > > > posting guidelines. > > > > > > > > > > 4) We can update the flexcoders FAQ (which is actually linked at the > > > > bottom > > > > > of every single post) to include the updated posting guidelines and > > > > remove > > > > > the common questions section so that the forum FAQ is only about > > forum > > > > > etiquette and the coding FAQ is about the actual problems. > > > > > > > > > > If this sounds OK then what we need are the two kinds of moderators: > > > > > > > > > > 1. moderators for the forum itself who are willing to really > > look at all > > > > > posts that are in moderation and analyze whether they should be > > passed > > > > > through. If it is a poorly formed question, the post should be > > rejected > > > > with > > > > > a pointer to the forum FAQ. > > > > > 2. moderators for the FAQ who can pay attention to common > > questions and > > > > > update the FAQ as appropriate. > > > > > > > > > > If we're all on board, send those moderators to me and we can > > get things > > > > set > > > > > up. And folks can start following the tagging convention > > instantly in the > > > > > meantime. > > > > > > > > > > Matt > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Douglas Knudsen > > > > http://www.cubicleman.com > > > > this is my signature, like it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
