Alexander E. Patrakov wrote: > 2008/3/3, Alan Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> * PM (This is very a technical issue and an emotive one, probably one of >> the most important too as it may affect everything that follows in LFS-NG) > > I am very surprised the nobody replied to my mail with the subject > "RPM: proof of concept". <snip />
Personally, it's a bit over my head, sorry. ;-). Also, I have a purely emotional bias against RPM. Give me anything else but RPM. (And don't ask me why... I tried Redhat some time ago and didn't like RPM. I use Ubuntu daily and think apt far superior. But whether it is right for LFS or not is *not* something I feel able to comment on. Yet.) > >> * Presentation (How we deliver/provide LFS-NG to the community, e.g. >> Book, Dynamic web based, LMS, local machine-based application? More than >> one?) > > I think that a "local machine-based application" option is the worst > of them all. Reason: it is the least reliable, and the only one that > doesn't allow easy changes of the presentation. For me, LFS must stay > as "data" from the user's viewpoint, not "data+program", because bugs > in the program will prevent the use of the data, and the reader is > supposed to be able to discard or fix wrong data, but not fix errors > in a program. Think about the recently reported jhalfs breakage in > French locales as an example. No program, no bugs in it. Totally agree. +n (n=as many as possible) >> * Structure (The modular courseware approach, or something else?) > > This can only be defined after deciding about the target audience(s). Probably you are right, although making it modular means that it "should (This should be a "must" thinking about it more) be possible for the more experienced user to skip the early sections. That's my thought about it anyway. >> Perhaps some simple poll or voting system on the Wiki for areas of >> contention be set-up and some basic rules about voting decided before we >> start? (Having been closely following the MSOOXML fiasco, let's not look >> like ISO please?) > > IMHO, voting should be used only as a last-resort method to come to an > agreement, because the minority's opinion is completely ignored. > Polls, on the other hand, are a good method to throw away options that > nobody likes. > Good point. A last resort solution is fine by me (But when do we decide that we are at that point?). A consensus is usually the best outcome, however we have already seen some of the personalities on here getting rather bruised or inflated. At least a vote - on a particular proposal/decision - reduces it to a solely numbers game... Al -- The way out is open! http://www.theopensourcerer.com -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
