2010/6/28 Karsten Wade - kw...@redhat.com <+tosmaillist+neophyte_rep+4c8a4e5c8a.kwade#redhat....@spamgourmet.com>: > On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 02:33:14PM -0700, > tosmaillist.neophyte_...@ordinaryamerican.net wrote: > > I'm going to trim out the top of your well-reasoned comments, because > I generally don't disagree with them. I want to focus on your > conclusion, which actually draws from an underlying thesis: > >> In my opinion, a tool set review and switch is a very good idea at >> this stage of the project. > > That seems to presume that a switch is called for.
I'm sorry, I should have written an American English sentence that more precisely carried my meaning: In my opinion, it appears that the current tool set has been chosen from personal experience with the tools chosen rather than from a set of carefully enumerated requirements. Since it is still early in the life of this project, the documentation may still benefit from an open discussion of tools requirements. The end result may be continuing to use the tools that produced 0.8 or it may bring to light a superior tool set that would encourage their use by their quality. To answer your schedule concerns, I see no reason this discussion can not proceed while 0.9 is produced with the current tool set. _______________________________________________ tos mailing list tos@teachingopensource.org http://teachingopensource.org/mailman/listinfo/tos
