On Sep 21, 2014 2:54 PM, "leinfelder" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Certainly, feature requests need to be triaged to be useful to anyone - especially the core team. It seems like having those potential items in a forum like this is a good way to organize and evaluate them through discussion and informal voting just like we are doing now. On this topic alone, there are three different people clamoring for the feature and one [possibly] threatening to fork and never look back; not the kind of new projects we want to be encouraging... >
(For anyone just tuning in, there was no hostility or real divergence, we're just discussing contribution processes on GitHub, and triage etiquette.) > It seems like you do your project planning and outreach on github, so I'm not sure why you wouldn't want all the information to do that planning in that same location. There are already "question", "enhancement" and "Backlog" labels as well as a "v2.0" milestone. Why not use them to your benefit? Questions become a ready-made FAQ section and reduce traffic on your email list over time, while enhancements allow you to do informed project planning in a transparent way. Collaboration Shangri-La! > I'm hearing you. I'll cross post this to the mailing list, because even as we talk about it I'm concerned that we're excluding precisely the audience that would potentially object :-D. I don't have a sense of whether there's a big constituency that agrees, but I consider email the most accessible collaboration medium for a diverse audience of maintainers, developers, and users. For all that is great about GitHub, folks have at their disposal a diversity of tools and practices for sorting, organizing, prioritizing, drafting, and conversing via email. I don't have any problem with enhancements having GitHub tickets, but I do think it's important to have an active mailing list and that it is the best place to establish fitness for inclusion and community interest when discussing proposed changes and features ahead of implementation. :-/ As Nick said, reopen anything that gets closed if you want to look at it again. I don't think that's mutually exclusive of encouraging use of the mailing list. If you find email useful or you think it fragments and or hides things you'd rather have on GitHub, speak up, whatever your thoughts! I am perennially somewhat enamored with this conversation (really!) each time it comes up somewhere I subscribe. I think my preference is to take your thoughts about FAQ, roadmap, etc, and to turn that into better documentation that is in the repo, which would provide that transparency of purpose and scope to reduce bewilderment, but for active discussion of proposals pre-implementation we simply document and encourage email as preferred first contact. Reasonable? Dumb and backward? Heh. I don't know!
_______________________________________________ annotator-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/annotator-dev Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/annotator-dev
