Leo Sutic wrote: [...]
I completely agree with the *purpose* of using the STATUS file - both as an indicator of the current situation and as a log of what has been voted on.Yes, it is clumsy, but it doesn't need to be done by everybody for every proposal-vote. I', tracking down sometimes things very often, but usually it's not needed.
However, I think it is a very clumsy way of doing it - I have to SSH to apache, fire up CVS, update STATUS, make my changes, commit them. That, in addition to the usual [VOTE/PROPOSAL/VOTE-RESULT] message that should be sent to the mailing list.
So when you write a proposal, you put it in the file, and then commit the votes once usually, no need to track it down much.
I have been thinking about getting the same functionality, but using Bugzilla (one bug per vote, add comments as the vote progresses, mark the bug as [VOTE] and you can query for it) or our brand new Wiki (put the STATUS file up as AvalonStatus, just surf in, edit and hit submit). We'd get the same functionality, but in a much leaner package.These don't have authentication, while CVS does. Maybe even more important, Wiki is clumsy at notifying changes, while Bugzilla is clumsy to use for votes, since votes must be done too also on the mailing list.
I've used it for some time now, and if the person that makes a proposal-vote tracks that, it's quite easy to do.
When we will have subversion, it will be much easier, with no ssh tunneling to set up, just a file edit basically.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
