Hi Quim,
Thanks for the invitation. I did not attend Wikimania but would be
interested in setting up an office hour to discuss ideas about improving
features design and development, including TechCom and the roles of tech
ambassadors, ECT, and ECL in features. Could we set up a time off-list?
Quoting MZMcBride: ...the two issues (a rush to deploy
features versus resource allocation for unwanted features), while
sometimes intertwined, can certainly also be discrete. I agree with you
in this point, and the Technical Committee is intended in part to
improve both situations.
Quoting
On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 8:34 AM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:
Quim, it seems to me that the methods used by Features have repeatedly
produced troubled results over the years, so it's time for a different
approach.
Note that the approach of empowering Tech Ambassadors to explicitly
Meta comment: if our common goal is to increase collaboration, then we need
to excel ourselves in this collaboration precisely. If we minority of
tech-aware contributors are being confrontational between ourselves, then
we can only expect to nurture more confrontation than collaboration among
the
Quim, can you clarify your comments about the Technology Committee? The
committee is my proposal as a community member; it is not a top-down,
Board-created idea. Its membership is designed to be broadly representative
of the MediaWiki user community. The Board mandate is necessary to give
TechCom
Hi,
On Wed, 2014-08-06 at 12:01 +1000, svetlana wrote:
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014, at 06:58, Quim Gil wrote:
- encourage feedback by absolutely /anyone/ about the next features they'd
like,
Betas and Bugzilla today. Phabricator should make it easier to provide
feedback in a wider range
With due notes that I just yesterday updated my nick and my e-mail, and I'm the
one who started this thread;
On Wed, 6 Aug 2014, at 06:58, Quim Gil wrote:
- encourage feedback by absolutely /anyone/ about the next features they'd
like,
Betas and Bugzilla today. Phabricator should make
