David Crossley wrote:
Thorsten Scherler wrote:
Ferdinand Soethe wrote:
5 As a supportive measure, clearly mark threads in this list when they
deal with a particular branch
+1
so that people not working on that
issue can safely ignore it.
-1
All PMC members should feel responsible for *all* issues of forrest.
We should do whatever we can manage and try to
not ignore anything.
My
background is certainly views where I am the position of *not* ignoring
this threads but sometimes it seems to me that the rest is doing it.
Well i certainly am not. I try to read everything
and only respond if i think that i need to.
Even started my next project to use views, so
expect more development soon.
I trust you to get on and do the best you can
and i will try to help when i can manage it.
Please don't take silence to mean that nobody cares.
That is not true.
Yes, I think these comments are true for most devs. We all have limited
time and assume that lazy consensus is in operation most of the time. To
be honest, I am a little offended that my input, when it comes, is not
recognised (actually I'm not, I know that is not what you meant but it
supports my point, others, who do not know your style, may well be
offended by comments like those above).
Most of my time is being taken up with general issues
for the Forrest project, so i don't often have the
time to help. I wish that other people would help more
with that stuff, applying the patches, guiding the
new developers.
+1000 (and a big thank you to David)
That cannot keep on in the future. Let me give you an example why not.
Imaging I have a car accident and dead (very drastic example I have to
admit but it is possible). Now all forrest devs are kindly ignoring the
[views] thread, what is happening then?
We could say the same about things like the
catalog entity resolver. I wonder who else besides
me understands it or enhances it.
Or plugins half way through the 0.7 dev, or the locationmap, or i18n or
any one of the features within Forrest. Thorsten, you really must
understand that you are only considering your own baby - it *is*
important, but no more important than any of the other features being
introduced. The level of input you get on views is comparable to the
level of input on other peoples "babies". As David said, silence means
we trust you to do a good job, we speak up when we see a problem or an
easier way of doing things, otherwise we let you get on with it (and in
most cases use it with pleasure).
There other things that i want to solve with views
before diving in. Like the unfinished thread about
"Defining Views Terminology".
+1000 - there was a proposal some time ago (written by someone not
currently credited by you as doing any work for views). Your response to
that was "I'm working on a proposal", but so far nothing has been
forthcoming and we have not had your input on the second thread that
David started (also not credited with doing any work on views).
[Note, I'm not pointing fingers with these bracketed comments, just
trying to further illustrate my point of potential offense given by
these statements]
And i think that moving the core to XHTML2 is more
important at this stage, so i will put my "spare"
energy there. Don't see that as ignoring "views"
as i expect that will help.
Actually, I thought forrest:views in core were going to be the first
version of Forrest wusing XHTML2. So your work on XHTML2 *is* work on
helping forrest:views move to core.
Ross
