Let me state upfront that I don't contribute to the project *at all*, so that my opinion may be weighted as such, however ...
On 5/13/08, Emmanuel Blot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Well, IIRC, only asmodai and you shared the opinion that those > > changesets weren't a problem, others were inclined to think more like > > me. Plus cmlenz and eblot were not part of that discussion, and I think > > their opinion matters. So I don't see the problem in presenting my > > arguments again, in a more structured way, on a discussion list were the > > topic can reach a wider audience (translators and other Trac contributors). > > I have not (yet) followed this topic, but there is a more general > question / issue there: > > I'm not living on the IRC channel, and as a very personal opinion I'm > not a big fan of IRC as the primary channel to take decision about the > project. As my contribution to the project is very low, I don't (ahd > should not) mind if that's the way the project main directions are > chosen, but I think it's quite disturbing for people not to get > informed about those decisions. They are not clearly visible (I know > that they are IRC transcript, but it is far less convenient than a > mailing list IMVHO.) > > Therefore, it would be nice - when an agreement is reached on the IRC- > that a project leader post a summary of the decision to the Trac Dev. > > There have been a lot of "decisions" that have been taken on the IRC > that I'm/was not aware of - I guess I'm not alone (?) - ... no, you're not. I've joined the Trac Dev mailing and I'm disappointed by the amount of project process related mail I see coming by. From the perspective where I am (i.e. outside of IRC), the Trac project looks almost dormant with only a few mails per week. > and for the > sole purpose of a coherent project I think it would be nice to get > these summaries. It's easier to track, easier to get updated, etc. > Maybe a better way would be a Wiki page in TracDev and a post to > trac-dev@ to signal a new page/decision exists? > > I know that this takes time and its far easier to ask for something > than to actually do it ;-) > Nevertheless, I think that would help the project, and help to > understand why Noah's answers feel sometimes a bit peremptory - to me > at least. > > To sum up: > The more people (developers, translators, contributors) involved, the > more documentation needed. IRC may be convenient to discuss about a > topic, but IMHO IRC is not the way to document the resulting decision. It's only kind of related, but I've also been very surprised by the fact that you (as in the Trac project) refer people to IRC when they have process or development related questions: if you were to use a mailing list for answering their questions, you'd automagically build up an archive of FAQs. What would be easier than to refer people to the archives instead of answering the questions on IRC (over and over?)... Anyway, I know I'm not contributing... Bye, Erik. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Trac Development" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/trac-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
