On Sun, 2005-08-28 at 14:19 +1000, David Crossley wrote: > Thorsten Scherler wrote: > > 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. > > First of all, you will need to try very hard to > be able to offend me. You were not. >
:) Cheers for telling me this, that is a relief. I am lucky that you are know me quite well because you help me from the beginning. > I was trying to use myself as an example to show various > things: that everyone has their own itches to scratch, > silence does not mean disinterest, that people are actually > reading your commits and emails but not necessarily > contributing, people are busy doing other things, we each > have something that we wish others would work more on, > there are some fundamental issues that need to be cleared, etc. > I understand, believe me I really do. The thread was as well only an example of myself. > I try to use myself as an example so that there is no > risk of other people getting offended or unnecessarily > defensive. That backfired today :-) > ;-) > I agree whole-heartedly with your warning about ignoring > threads and at the same time i am saying that we need to > allow people to particpate in some things and not others. > Yes, I agree but we need to define core components and this core components should be understood and enhanceable from many active PMC member. I really do not want to see that we depend on individuals, we have do depend on the community. That is as well why I think we should rename whiteboard to incubation. All components that need more community support should go here. If we want to follow Stephano's dreamlist we have to be very clear on the community part of components. > By the way, thanks for daring to use "views" as a case > to discuss these important issues about how this small > yet diverse project can operate. > :) You are welcome. > More below ... > > > Ross Gardler wrote: > > > David Crossley wrote: > > > > Thorsten Scherler wrote: > > > >> > > > >>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*! > > You did already. I was trying to dispel your impression > that nobody is interested. > > I should have prefaced my comments to explicitly > say that i was supporting and exploring the issues, > and that there was no offence. > Cheers. > > 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. > > No need. Even in one's native language these issues > are hard to deal with. Important issues often are. > > Start from the point of trust. We know that you are > not offending anyone. Feel free to say whatever you need. > jeje Are you sure ;-) thx > > 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. > > You didn't. Actually that was perhaps my fault. > Re-read that paragraph. (Thanks to Tim for breaking > into another important thread). I wonder if i should > have been more explicit. > > I was suggesting that all of us need to slow down on > our pet topics for a little while, help out more with > the general parts of the project, especially the naming > and core pipeline re-arrangement and efficiency issues > that plague us at the moment. This will enable each of > us to catch up and have a chance to investigate and then > help with these new functionalities like "views". > > If other people helped more with applying patches, > then people like me would be relieved and could help > more with views development. There is one patch > sitting there from a new developer. Who is going to > commit it before i get compelled to jump in? > You are right. That is really a thing that I need working on. Anyway, like always said, I see views different and by getting into views I understood that this will change the general parts of the project. That is why I keep on asking for getting the views integration done. Let me give you an example. The xhtml2 change will force us to rewrite the same pipes that we need to change for the views core integration! Another point is the integration of the locationmap. Right now it is set up but there have to be touched a lot of pipes to really use it, again that are nearly the same like for views. Knowing this made me ask everybody to get into views. > > > >>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. > > I agree entirely. We were actually giving other cases > in support of that. It is a recognised fact that each > area has one or two main developers. It is important that > we all do broaden our focus to assist with other areas. > Yes, that is as well a big topic over in cocoon land where many threads contain something like "we do not need yet another one man block show". I always tried not only to focus on views that is only the component that I best understand in forrest. ;-) Views are historical a derivate of skins, another area where only few forrest committer felt really responsible. We all have to dive into all core areas of forrest I totally agree. IMO if somebody start using views that will be pretty obvious to him/her. ;-) > > > 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. > > Then we need to finalise it and do the renaming actions > that were discussed. That is the backgound work that > needs to happen before the rest of the project can > really assist with views. Agreed, but just let us get over it and like Dave used to say "more code, less talk". I am talking about views, their background and concepts since last year, it is all in the archives. I am a wee bit tiered to constantly repeating myself. > > > 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. > > Hey that is a great idea. You take the thread [1] > and summarise it to describe each facet of the > "views" in German and English (the English ones > are almost there just need summarising). Then > because we have quite a few German speakers on > this list, we can clarify the English definitions. > > [1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=112276643700001 > Re: Defining Views Terminology > jeje ok I will do that as time allows. > > 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. > > The naming is extremely important, well chosen names > are very powerful. They can instantaneously convey > the whole concept. > Yes, agreed. I have chosen the names because I thought they will do that. I failed and need help on that. ;-) > > 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. > > Please no, we need your input. Hmm, actually it is all in the archive. Anyway, I will help out where I can. > > For me, one of the best things about [1] was that it > started to define all the separate pieces of the puzzle > and helped me to see more of what "views" are about. > However, it is still too clouded. > jeje ok, I see your point. It is dead easy if you have started once. ;-) > The process that we started at ApacheCon was to > carefully explain each piece and then the names > would become apparent. > Perfect, anyway it was my mistake that I did not just gave a overview of views and an example of the usage before we started this process. That would have been better. > > > [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. > > We need a concentrated effort from all developers > to move the core to xhtml2. The job is too big to > be left to one or two people - it will not happen. > I suggest that we all need to stop scratching our > own itches for a little while and just do it. > See above. Calling for community help for views has the background that I see we need to touch the same pipes for XHTML2, LM and Views. Why touching them 3 times when we can touch them once. Yes, we all have to help out for the integration. First we have to have a basic example for xhtml2 internal which we can discuss and implement. Which leads to the other point of my thread that we need more discussion with actual code example and less general discussion. Discussions (doco, xhmtl2,...) have to lead to roadmaps and code, otherwise they follow the motto "nice having talked about it". See Joachim, David et. al. they would welcome a to do list that they can follow. Having said this, it is hard to make such lists. ;-) BTW talking about pets, we have to release them into the wildness again. ;-) > -David salu2 -- thorsten "Together we stand, divided we fall!" Hey you (Pink Floyd)
