Ralph Goers wrote:
Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
is resolved in the same way as an ordinary external block URI. To make this possible the role of being a super block must be identifiable among the connections in the wiring info. Maybe by reserving the name "super" for this case.
WDYT?
/Daniel
A few thoughts here (that aren't necessarily directed at you):
1. I may have missed some points in this discussion. When the email gets to be long or quotes previous nested emails in their entirety I tend to just move on and ignore the post. So, as a rule I would recommend keeping posts as short and sweet as possible.
While I agree in general, It is quite hard to achieve. At some point we need to get from discussing about the general requirements and the broad vision about things, and get into designing the gory details. And at that point we need to use examples (which takes place) to assure that our proposed solutions actually work and that we talking about the same things. It is also necessary to discuss some edge cases that most users hopefully don't need to understand, but which would bite them if we didin't take care about them in the design.
If you'll notice, there have only been a few participants in these discussions. Maybe its just me, but I wonder if others aren't jumping in with their thoughts for the same reason.
I have certainly noticed that there are few participant in the discussion. I think an important reason is that the discussed subject (blocks) is rather difficult and takes quite some while to learn enough about to be able to participate in detailed design discussions.
For my own part I found blocks attractive and important from the very beginning, when Stefano presented them maybe three years ago. But it took me long time before I started to participate in the discussions as the focus on the blocks work in the beginning was about things that I didn't know much about. People believed that it was necessary to switch component manager before we could start to actually implement blocks. And I didn't know much about componment managers back then.
Anyway, if you (or others) think that we are dicussing something that you would like to participate in but is lost in all the details, just ask us about some background or for a summary of the issues. As long as you don't comment it is hard to know if anyone reads. And the allready long mails would be endless if we by default started with a summary of the whole thread.
2. I've noticed a few discussions that are mainly between you and Reinhard with other folks posting occaisionally. Although you two may come to agreement on some ideas, given item 1 I wonder if it actually is the concensus of the community.
I'm certain that people will start to have opinions when we start to have an implementation. Until then lazy concensus is enough.
<snip>stuff that Reinhard commented</snip>
/Daniel
