In a message of Thu, 26 Jan 2006 15:56:51 +0100, Dario Lopez-Kästen writes: > >uh, this discussion, IMNSHO, is rapidly becoming non-interesting. And I >am a bit upset at seeing the same discussion popup again and again. > >So, can we please just decide on what software to use? I am not >interested in, at least as I perceive it, this covert blame-game that is >currently going on.
This is not blame. This is a complete and unreconciable difference of opinion as to what is desirable in the way to do work. There is an important difference. There is a reason why Python has dozens and dozens of webframeworks and workflow systems. People who start off using any one often end up really unhappy because the design of the system does not match the way that they want to structure the work. And when they get really unhappy, they go off and write their own system. >What happened, happende, let's not let it happen again. The problems we >had we had were had for specific reasons - most of them had nothing to >do with the technology. They had everything to do with the technology, and whether the technology made it possible for them to do what it was they wanted to do in the way that they wanted to do it, or whether some things 'just couldn't be done' or 'were easier to do manually' and so on and so forth. These are the very working conditions that make people decide that one technology does not suit their needs and go get, or write another one. But given our diverse community, it is not surprising that we cannot find a fit which suits everybody. Consider CherryPy, to pick something that we aren't using, and as far as I know are not considering using, so should not unduly stress people out. I have heard both of these comments about CherryPy's likeness to PHP. It is 'a major strength that allows people to work in ways they prefer and enjoy', or 'an abomination, like the PHP it resembles, that makes it working with it an intolerable experience'. There is no hope in getting these two reviewers to meet in some happy middle. You might, if you worked hard at it, create a work experience that both of them dislike, but pleasing them both is impossible. There is a reason why we have so many webframeworks, and that does not reflect badly on us. People really, really, really do care about how they work, and really prefer to do things in ways that other people hate. Indeed, the same feature _often_ works that way. >Bottom line: is the software ready or not? > >We need NOT to integrate the website with INFORMATION on the conference >with any other conference reg.system, automated or manual. I've managed >larger conferences that EPC without any automated systems. ust a website >with info (edicted with a texteditor). What is relevant is whether the people who plan to manage EP2006 want integration, most definitely do not want integration, or do not care. >So, how much time do folks that have interests in EPC using their >software need to set up working environments so that the rest of us can >evaluate? I think that, should there be any evaluation to be done, only the people who have already planned to do a lot of work in organising the conference should do it. Otherwise we risk getting a system based on the needs and desires of irrelevant people. So if CERN is full of people who are already familiar with the CERN system and prefer to use it because it is what they know and are familiar with, then that would be reason enough for me to conclude they should use it. My problem is that so far I haven't heard from any knowledgable CERN system people. The people who were pushing it, were doing so, despite being unfamiliar with it. This is Proof by 'it must work, lots of people have used it'. But if there is one thing we have figured out, in enormous detail, is that 'working for lots of people' does not imply 'working for you' or even 'having what you would consider the most elementary and necessary features implemented'. People implement features in accordance to what they consider 'essential' and the variation among different tools is large. >Perhaps there are more people than just Strakt and CERN interested in >having their software evaluated? > >We need to have a decision on this soon. And please - let's keep the >requirements at a sensible and practical level. This is the problem. What one person considers 'an unreasonable requirement' somebody else considers 'an essential requirement'. > >Is 10 days enough time for the interested parties to set their systems up >? > >/dario What I would like to see is a discussion, or a report, or something from the CERN Europython organising team as to what it is that they want, in freatures, usability, whatever-. Now it may be that they are feeling inhibited in discussing it, because they would in general discuss this in French. I'd say, discuss or post it in French. I'd just like to make sure that you know what you want, ahead of time, and, should you prefer to use one system or another, that you have some reason for using it beyond 'it was developed here and we feel we have to use it' or 'why not?', or 'somebody told me it was cool'. Because I have already gone through the 'we should use some system because somebody else likes it' route. And the 'I never thought about it much, but surely any system would work in some reasonable way, they way I consider reasonable ... it ought to have the appropriate capabilities, even though I have never used it, just because' route. This is an invitation to an unbelievable amount of stress. You can make yourself sick over this. I want to spare you all this agony. I really and truly believe that the conference organisers should use a system they like and enjoy using. If you don't have a candidate, possibly because you have never used a system and you want to go try the Strakt system, to see if you like it, then we can set something up. If you already have some other system you know and love, this is fine with me too. The other thing this report would be useful for is to locate: 'who besides Benedikt is organising this thing'? Even with track chairs, Europython is way to much work for one person to handle the 'onsite preparation details'. If Benedikt needs help, then we need to hear about this as soon as possible. take care all, Laura _______________________________________________ EuroPython mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/europython
