On Wed, 3 Jan 2018 21:09:17 -0500 Michael Blumenkrantz <michael.blumenkra...@gmail.com> said:
> On Sat, 23 Dec 2017 19:37:31 +0900 > Carsten Haitzler <ras...@rasterman.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, 22 Dec 2017 19:54:02 +0000 Andrew Williams <a...@andywilliams.me> > > said: > > > > > Hi Vincent, > > > > > > I would really love this too - in fact I have been pushing for it. I > > > suggest regularly that it would be helpful to have a roadmap. On my most > > > recent request I was told bluntly “too much effort, you are the only > > > person that wants it”. > > > > https://phab.enlightenment.org/T5301. you keep telling me "that's not a > > roadmap". > > > > comparison table: > > > > | | T5301 | GTK+ | > > | Has title | X | X | > > | Has short description | X | X | > > | Has longer (multi-parapgraph) descriptions | Some | Some | > > | Has assignment of who is doing it | X | X | > > | Has status/priority | X | X | > > | Are a changing "document" | X | X | > > | Has dependencies | X | | > > | Has discussion thread | X | | > > > > OH look there. it has everything your supposed roadmap has and even more! > > What were you telling me that this is not a roadmap? Please indicate > > clearly how it is not as I have clearly shown above that it has everything > > you claim a roadmap has (you would want that document linked to) and even > > then some more. > > > > > If we can get more support for such a document I would be far happier to > > > push forward again and see it is pulles together. > > > > The document exists. Stop saying it doesn't. You just want someone to write > > it up in a table on a wiki page (which is what the GTK+ one is) instead of > > as tickets. If you want that - then you do it. And maintain it. > > Unless I've misread the previous mail, Andy has just said that if people are > in favor of such a page that he is willing to do the work. I'm confused by > the apparently hostile demeanor of your reply considering that someone has > just offered to do the work which was requested? Andy spent several hours in a private IRC /msg session telling me a roadmap document doesn't exist, and I kept pointing him to this, sayning that maybe it can be fleshed out a little more, but all of the essentials are there, the him repeating it's not a roadmap, then I see these emails pointing to something as "oh that's a roadmap". and it is in essence exactly what I spent hours pointing him to. And the next day or so was this. I was entirely irked. He never offered to write it until this mail. So you missed the bit where he kept me up until like 3am or whatever telling me we have no roadmap, never actually volunteering to write it. > That task in phab (which cannot be found from the phab wiki, the main site > wiki, or a google search) does not constitute a project roadmap of the sort > that this thread is discussing. A roadmap should be visible and easy to > locate, it should be readable by those who are not project insiders, and it That I do agree with - it's kind of hidden without being publicized. > should be a usable document for people working on related projects to judge > whether they can/should contribute to the major tasks or if their projects > will use any of the current/upcoming work items. I'm not interested in > nitpicking or being pedantic; no, I didn't reference a dictionary or > wikipedia or technical journals to arrive at my definition, this is just my > expectation upon seeing the roadmap for any project. The cited task fulfills > none of these criteria in my view. T5301 does to me represent a roadmap. As much as the GTK one does. It doesn't have timelines, but then again neither does what is being pointed to as a shining example. It has a list of tasks with their status - only thing missing on the T5301 page is the short 1 or 2 line description. > Furthermore, although I appreciate the time that you put into creating this > ascii comparison table to demonstrate the possibility that our ticket is > better than their actual roadmap, this table is itself irrelevant because the > phabricator task has no correlation to release planning and thus is not a > roadmap such as the one linked in the original mail. Actually it is the same thing. As much as what is being referenced. That ticket was originally intended for "EFl 1.20" and has since been pushed to 1.21. it's for a release like the "GTK+ 4 checklist" is for a release. Perhaps it needs to mention that in the top of the ticket. > I'm in full support of having a roadmap for EFL to try coordinating releases > around. This would make our supposed time-based release schedule more > sensible and less "I think we're maybe still waiting for some feature but I > don't know what it is or who's working on it?". Right now our time base releases are not really functioning because we're trying to do a FEATURE based release... which is precisely what that ticket is and what a "GTK+ 4 roadmap" is. Releases are waiting for this. Time and feature based releases are different dimensions. We could just do another time based release now, but none of the EO stuff is usable yet and still will be switched off. So they are orthogonal. > > > Thanks, > > > Andy > > > On Fri, 22 Dec 2017 at 16:57, Vincent Torri <vincent.to...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > hello > > > > > > > > i've recently seen this gtk roadmap : > > > > https://wiki.gnome.org/Projects/GTK%2B/Roadmap/GTK4 > > > > > > > > is there the same for EFL ? > > > > > > > > Vincent > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > > > > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > enlightenment-devel mailing list > > > > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > > > > > > > -- > > > http://andywilliams.me > > > http://ajwillia.ms > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > > > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > > > _______________________________________________ > > > enlightenment-devel mailing list > > > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > > > > > -- ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- Carsten Haitzler - ras...@rasterman.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
