Before you read this reply, please read again my original reply. Did you read it, ok then go ahead and please be not offended that your name may not be mentioned here or in the other thread but you actually contributed to views in any form. That is not my intention. I was focusing on code for views and the common danger of ignoring threads.
On Sat, 2005-08-27 at 14:51 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote: > 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. > I should have written *seems*! I know and it was nothing against somebody en special and least against you or Ross! See your response about the comments, I was not aware of it myself and you pointed us in the right direction. Now if you would have kindly ignored the thread, then we would try to find the problem in views. Thx for being an example for *not* ignoring threads. > 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). > I wrote: > The answer is that Diwaker and Cyriaque are the only > ones beside me that contributed to the code base. I was actually thinking about commits or patches that where made to the view code base. I should have written committed. I always consider input as very welcome and you are right that this are contributions as well. I am awe-fully sorry if I have offended somebody with my comments that was not my intention. English is not my first language and my choice of words seems to cause many confusion lately. I am sorry for that. Anyway right now I wish more input with code examples and was talking about that. If somebody recommend some changes to sources then this is best done with code examples (aka patches) or commits. Diwaker and Cyriaque provided patches that extended the views code base and enhanced the implementation. For example David et. al. as well is committing to the code base regularly, I did not mentioned everyone because I was thinking about patches. > > 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) > Yes, you, David and Ross, are doing an awesome job. Thanks very much. Sorry, if I offended you, it was not my intention. > >>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. No, I actually did not only consider my own baby, that was only an example. Replace [views] and my person with all your mentioned features and they main supporter like Ross and plugins, David and catalog entity resolver,... My point was that we cannot "kindly ignore" threads that may are not our personal focus. > The level of input you get on views is comparable to the > level of input on other peoples "babies". Yes, you are right. Maybe because it is replacing/extending skins. > 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). > Yes, again you are right. Sometimes I only wish that code example would be a bigger part of the input. > > 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). > I did not add more to this threads because I did not had to add anything. Everything was already said. Actually I have 10 different versions of this proposal in my draft dir and I guess they contain all specific answers to the threads you mentioned. Not one is there that I am convinced of. Actually on the end I was on the one hand close to recommend to change nothing and on the other to agree with all written by you and david. Further to rename e.g. views into themes or structurer has as many downsides as keeping the name IMO. I guess it is because I have my own point of view what views are and I am obviously not able to explain myself. I guess if I could explain and name it in German then that would be different. Anyway please be not offended that I have not given Ross and David credits for the threads, which are really awesome. See above I had more code in mind. I actually I will not keep on trying finishing the proposal. I want to concentrate on coding views independent from any naming rather then discussing the chosen names. It's all hollow words in the end. Please feel free to propose new naming convention for views and assume that lazy consensus is in operation from my part. Be sure if I see a problem or an easier way of doing things that I will speak up. > [Note, I'm not pointing fingers with these bracketed comments, just > trying to further illustrate my point of potential offense given by > these statements] Sorry, that was not my intention. > > > 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. > Yes, but there a *million* thinks to do (coding) to move views to the core. The changes of the contracts to accept xhtml2 as input I consider as one of the easiest part in the process. As soon as we have a xhtml2 internal format we can quickly change the contracts. contracts are very flexible in regards of input format. still that is only one thing. I agree that the move to xhtml2 is very important but IMO that should be happen parallel to views integration. > Ross salu2 -- thorsten "Together we stand, divided we fall!" Hey you (Pink Floyd)
