On 19 jan 2012, at 18:09, Michel Fortin wrote: > Le 2012-01-19 à 11:02, Andrei Alexandrescu a écrit : > >> I honestly am giving up on this. I won't even look at other suggested >> products. There seems to be no shared vision of what kind of organization we >> need and even no consensus that we need better organization. To summarize my >> understanding: >> >> 1. Walter is (a) opposing trello, (b) not enthusiastic about changing much, >> (c) working kindly on particular examples discussed here (e.g. the oldest >> bugs). >> >> 2. Don is already organized in his approach to fixing bugs and doesn't think >> adding some project planning software would help. >> >> 3. Brad's opinion is that we're having a social issues that tools can't >> solve, and brings as evidence the fact that we don't use all features of our >> existing tools. Brad is not a strong participant in terms of code but is a >> key contributor of logistics and infrastructure. >> >> 4. Kenji is too gentleman to participate. I personally think his work is so >> awesome, if anything I'd be afraid the introduction of whatever tools to >> disrupt it in any way. >> >> 5. Leandro has the strong opinion that we don't need additional tools. He's >> not a massive participant to D but I mention this because he argues his >> point very passionately. I'm looking forward to equal passion in >> participation to D itself. >> >> 6. A few others thought they'd give it a whirl and joined trello. We have a >> project there with two items and a few tumbleweeds. >> >> Given this state of affairs, it's very unlikely we're poised to operate a >> change of significant impact. > > > The problem with settings milestones is that everyone need to feel > constrained by them, otherwise they are meaningless. More generally, what's > needed is a way to take decisions and have everyone accept them. But before > agreeing on a solution, the problem needs to be understood by everyone. > > My understanding is that there is so many problems to fix everywhere that > everyone is focussing on a small aspect and no one really get the whole. Like > a giant castle that need to be repaired and extended, someone needs to draw a > high-level map of it and then mark all the problematic areas and those that > need to be built. Once you have that map you can plan a roadmap. > > Is bugzilla providing a good enough overview? Would it work better with > another tool? Maybe, maybe not. That's not important: pick the tool you want > and try to draw an accurate overview of all aspects of the language, making > everything that needing a fix or further development. Pick a drawing program > if you need to. What's important to make the biggest flaws stand out. Once > everyone can visualize the big picture, it'll be much easier to have everyone > agree to a roadmap. > > So adding a new tool is not the point of the exercise. The point is to have a > better overview, a better understanding, so better decisions can be taken and > agreed by everyone, and thus acted upon. > > Sorry if I stated the obvious.
No you're not. I think you're spot on. Andrei is focusing too much on the tools. -- /Jacob Carlborg _______________________________________________ dmd-internals mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals
