wren ng thornton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [Bug trackers are an excellent source of tasks for active developers to > use so things don't get lost, but they're awful for new developers. For > someone just joining the project it's rarely clear how important a task > is, how hard, or how far reaching its consequences (or whether someone's > already working on it). Good trackers have fields to note these things, > but the notes are engineered for active developers; the extent to which > those notes are even used or accurate varies wildly from project to > project. Hence, having a clear discussion about what things really are > important and how much they interact with everything else is a great boon.]
Agreed. In short, shouldn't Darcs come up with sth like http://wiki.winehq.org/JanitorialProjects or http://janitor.kernelnewbies.org/ perhaps? And of course with some serious up-to-date documentation on the theory behind Darcs. AFAIK Ian Lynagh started working on one. I'd say: first be precise. Don't be afraid of abstract algebra, it's university material, quite some people actually understands it. And those can later explain the hard to grasp parts. But I never felt like diving into the bunch of hazy metaphors I found about the inner workings of Darcs, even though I was and still am interested. So I nevert felt qualified to touch anything important or assess the performance problems for example. -- Cheers, Feri. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
