This makes sense, but I actually think it would be good to have a more
casual medium for discussion that *isn't* highly linked up and
searchable. Logs would certainly be useful, but the current media
(mailing list, tracker etc.) are very much public fora.
David Nickerson wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 7:02 AM, James Lawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dear CellML community,
We have had an IRC channel in the past, but I believe that it fell into
disuse. I have been pretty interested in getting it going again for
sometime, so I thought I'd canvass interest. Who thinks they'd be
interested? I'd suggest we just put it on freenode...
If I remember correctly, while it did fall into disuse there was an
actual decision made not to continue with that line of community
communication. Especially now as the tracker is being proposed as the
place to have specific discussions that maybe are not of general
interest to the community, it would seem to me to be a bad idea to add
one more independent archive that would need to be searched by users
in order to ensure they cover all possible previous discussion
threads.
Perhaps if there was some way to integrate freenode searches into the
tracker search engine then this would make more sense? Better yet,
provide a single search and respond interface for the tracker, mailing
lists, and any other discussion forum and then people can easily
choose the most appropriate medium for them to interact on (with?).
Andre.
_______________________________________________
cellml-discussion mailing list
cellml-discussion@cellml.org
http://www.cellml.org/mailman/listinfo/cellml-discussion
begin:vcard
fn:James Lawson
n:Lawson;James
org:Auckland Bioengineering Institute;CellML Model Repository Curator, CellML Team
adr:;;University of Auckland;;;;New Zealand
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:James Lawson
url:http://www.cellml.org
version:2.1
end:vcard
_______________________________________________
cellml-discussion mailing list
cellml-discussion@cellml.org
http://www.cellml.org/mailman/listinfo/cellml-discussion
