On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 9:27 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
P.S. I think this is a good example of why contributing to Sugar is
necessarily hard. Many small technical contributions from the community
require significant policy decisions by the leaders. When Sugar's
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 4:30 AM, Tomeu Vizoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 9:27 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
P.S. I think this is a good example of why contributing to Sugar is
necessarily hard. Many small technical contributions from the community
A good first towards solving this challenge is developing a project level self
awareness of the different types of decisions we make.
1. Pedagogical
2. Technical
3. Political
As a general rule we should strive to make decisions base on their pedagogical
soundness, technical merit, and
On 15 Oct 2008, at 09:30, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 9:27 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
P.S. I think this is a good example of why contributing to Sugar is
necessarily hard. Many small technical contributions from the
community
require significant
The hierarchy of types of decisions you mention is quite interesting.
I am afraid that expediency (can be done) might end up ruling things.
It is easier (or so I think) to reach consensus or at least an
I-can-live-with-that in technical matters.
The approach to the pedagogical view has so far
5 matches
Mail list logo