On May 25, 2007, at 6:19 AM, Yoav Shapira wrote:
All I see on this list is a bunch of very cool proposals, a slew of
+1s, and then labs get established. Super!
How come I never see any discussion of development? Any indication of
progress? Any commit messages?
I got all fired up to do the webarch lab, spent the time to migrate
the old uri spec to subversion, and then fell off the cliff of "what
to do next". To be honest, I find working alone on a project to be
completely uninspiring.
Here are my problems with labs in its current incarnation. These
are based on early choices that turned out to be more bother
than they are worth, IMO.
1. Somebody else has to vote on creation of a new lab.
I just don't see the point. I can understand having retroactive
votes wherein an inappropriate experiment is forcibly moved
elsewhere. I can also understand a documented list of things
that must be true for a lab to be started by a committer.
But I think we could easily replace the pre-proposal and vote
with a commit-then-review policy
2. There is only one dev mailing list and one commits mailing list.
Having only one list has the effect of removing opt-in
conversation.
In other words, I self-censor my chatter on this list about my lab
because I don't know if the others on the list are even remotely
interested, and I've reached the point in my life where I am very
sensitive about off-topic email. Likewise, several times I have
decided not to commit my other protocol archives because I am
worried about the size of the resulting commit notices. It may
be silly, but that's just enough doubt to make me delay another
day, and then the next, ...
3. There is no "here" here. I have no idea if anyone wants to
commit something to my lab, and no idea how to contribute to
someone else's lab without stepping on their toes. This is a
side-effect of lacking a defined communication channel in which
the PI can wonder aloud about what others can do, and others
can wonder aloud about what they might want to do. Jira is not
a substitute for people who do their best work offline.
I know the practical reasons for both of those constraints,
since I am one of those infrastructure guys who occasionally
creates mailing lists and subversion repos. But the current
setup doesn't really work for me. I think it is important that
webarch be publicly archived in a way that is usable by others,
which means a topic-limited mailing list. Should I create such
lists on on my own ISP to talk about an Apache lab? Or should
I move my lab to my ISP so there isn't any concern about dual
use of Apache resources? Or should I widen the httpd umbrella
into something that would include webarch docs?
*shrug*
I have just enough free time each day to worry about all
the things I could do with my free time that aren't being done.
....Roy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
