Note: I just realized this was gonig to the list, and individual emails as well. edited the to and cc fields.
On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <naftoli...@gmail.com>wrote: > I'm confused by your reply. > Firstly, I think I was clear that I'm not going to do anything that you or > David disapprove of. So if my idea is not a good one just scratch it! > In any case I'm confused by what you said. What is "hidden" about a Google > Docs document? Whoever wants to participate in the discussion can write in > the document. > The first problem is that anyone who might wish to comment hase to know about it. How often people either not check, not check thoroughly enough the existing mailing list as it is? So now you want them to read the mailing list or the wiki to find out about a discussion happening someplace else? That's going to complicate matters a whole lot. The second problem is that you won't be able to get away from the implication that things are being done behind the communities back. Pretty much no matter what you do. Again the problem is human beings. Everybody is not going to search, and some people are going to feel like that without a personal invitation to "join the elite working way over here", they have no opportunity to participate. The spreadsheet I created is just a data tracker. I fully expect, and encourage the discussions to happen on the lists. The limited number of people who can write to it is to prevent discussions happening away from the list, not to limit the discussion itself. That's why it has columns to put links to discussion on it. And if three people, or ten, discuss it there and then run it by everyone on > the list, those people will certainly not ignore what others on the list > have to say. > Was I unclear in the previous message? Or is my ignorance of Google Docs at > play? Or did I misunderstand something? > There's a huge difference between people working together, coming to the list and going what's the best way to solve 'X', or we think 'Y' would better the 'X' because of blah blah, and people working together and coming to the list and going "Change this!". There's an even bigger difference when the latter are some sort of "Refactor and Reorganize Lift Committee". Thanks. > > ------------------------------------- > Jim Barrows<jim.barr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Naftoli Gugenheim <naftoli...@gmail.com > >wrote: > > > 100%. > > But that need could be reconciled with my idea in either of two ways: > > 1. There is discussion taking place, just in the Google Docs file as > > opposed to the maling list. Anyone who wants can participate. The point > is > > that I suspect much of the reason everyone wants better naming but no one > is > > doing anything, is because there's a lot of overhead besides the actual > act > > of discussion. I think we need an approach that lets people 'just > discuss' > > the names in context, without any extra work like copy pasting into > > spreadsheets etc. > > > > > So, you're trying to drive disucssion to some place hidden from the rest of > the list (and by list I mean, users and creators of Lift). > > > > > 2. If that's not satisfactory, then we can summarize the discussion on > the > > list or just run the "conclusion" by everyone on the list. This way the > > discussion itself will remain lighweight and overhead-less, but it will > > still have to go through public scrutiny on the list before any ticket is > > filed. > > > > > To present the users and creators of Lift with, essentially, a fait > accompli? > > Leave me out of that one. > > > > > Of course if you still object we're all ears! > > Thanks. > > > > > > ------------------------------------- > > David Pollak<feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 7:16 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <naftoli...@gmail.com > > >wrote: > > > > > Does anyone object to this approach? > > > Any source file that's being reviewed (hopefully one or very few at a > > time) > > > should be uploaded to Google Docs as a text document. Discussion can > > consist > > > of the built in google chat functionality but mainly by inserting a ((( > > ... > > > ))) section in scaladoc comments and writing your name and thoughts > > there. > > > The advantage to this "poor man's code review" is that there's no > > overhead > > > for someone to join the effort - no arranging things in a spreadsheet > or > > > linking threads. I suspect that may have been an impediment until now. > > > Of course nothing will be merged back from there; it's just a context > for > > > discussion that may lead to tickets. > > > > > > > In general, folks shouldn't open tickets without a discussion on this > list > > and at least a nod from me, Marius, Derek or Tim. There are some > > exceptions > > to this general rule. For example, if there's an actual defect (e.g., > NPE > > de-serializing JSON data structures and you include a reproduceable case) > > or > > if you are me, Marius, Derek or Tim and you're queuing up work for > > yourself. > > > > Why? (1) the current ticketing system does not allow for good discussion > > of > > things and the whole community is not involved (2) one person's "defect" > is > > another person's feature so having a discussion to keep things oriented > > towards where Lift is going is a lot better on list and (3) some tickets > > like "write more documentation" serve no purpose because there's no > person > > attached to the work and those kinds of tickets just clutter the > ticketing > > system which doesn't have good filtering or prioritization tools as it > is. > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------- > > > Erkki Lindpere<vill...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > I just noticed that GitHub also lets you comment on *commits*, but not > > > files :( > > > > > > But Google Docs or whatever you end up deciding on works for me. > > > > > > On Dec 29, 11:42 pm, Ross Mellgren <dri...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > We have a code review board (reviewboard.liftweb.net), but it's > pretty > > > > geared towards changes. I don't know if it can be configured or used > > > > or what-have-you for reviewing the current state of code. > > > > > > > > -Ross > > > > > > > > On Dec 29, 2009, at 4:39 PM, Erkki Lindpere wrote: > > > > > > > > > Another option would be to use a specialized code review tool, > though > > > > > someone would have to host it. There's one thing that may not fit > > > > > about these, though: usually they are for reviewing *changes* and > not > > > > > existing code. I don't know what the good ones are, but some > > otherwise > > > > > commercial products are free for Open Source projects (all of these > > > > > list Git support as well): > > > > > > > > > SmartBear CodeCollaborator / CodeReviewer > > > > >http://smartbear.com/codecollab.php > > > > >http://smartbear.com/codecollab-buy.php<-- about open source > > > > > licensing > > > > > > > > > Atlassian Crucible > > > > >http://www.atlassian.com/software/crucible/ > > > > > > > > > http://www.atlassian.com/software/crucible/licensing-faq.jsp#open-source > > > > > <-- about open source licensing > > > > > > > > > I know there are some open source ones as well, personally I've > only > > > > > used Crucible once and an open source tool a long time ago (don't > > > > > remember which one). > > > > > > > > > Or how about writing a simple code review app in lift as an example > > > > > project :) > > > > > > > > > Erkki L > > > > > > > > > On Dec 29, 9:31 pm, Naftoli Gugenheim <naftoli...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > >> Neat, thanks! > > > > >> Where to post it is a very, very good question. I would suggest > not > > > > >> to invest much in a particular medium before you help us > > > > >> crystallize a good answer! > > > > >> (Attention all interested in the naming progess: I think we made > > > > >> good progress in terms of guidelines, and I think the next step is > > > > >> to discuss this question!) > > > > >> Originally the idea was to keep an organized Google Docs > > > > >> spreadsheet. I am not sure how sustainable the approach is though, > > > > >> because the amount of overhead may weigh it down too much. I am > > > > >> curious if that is part of why not much progress has been made. > > > > >> Jim, if you're reading this (I hope you are!) can you comment? > > > > >> The problem with just filing tickets is that everyone has > different > > > > >> ideas, so discussion may be necessary to arrive at a consensus. At > > > > >> least posting it here first means if someone objects he will have > a > > > > >> chance to voice his objection. > > > > >> One idea is one discusson thread, in the main Lift list, per Lift > > > > >> class. If everyone focuses on one or a few classes at a time it > > > > >> won't clog the list too much. > > > > >> Another idea of mine is to put the lift source file on Google Docs > > > > >> as a text document, and people can contribute to the discussion by > > > > >> writing inside the scaladoc comments. Nothing will get merged > > > > >> directly back to git; it's just a very lightweight way of > > > > >> discussing. E.g.: > > > > >> /** > > > > >> Xxxxx Xxxxxx xxx Xxx > > > > >> Erkki: why is xxx xx xxxxxxx > > > > >> nafg: well, xxx and xxx > > > > >> erkki: okay, but ... > > > > >> */ > > > > >> def someFoo ... > > > > > > > > >> What do you think? Very out of the box but it means very little > > > > >> copy-pasting work: the only overhead is uploading a source file; > > > > >> the rest is pure discussion in an inherently organized context. > > > > >> The disadvantage compared to threads on the list is that it won't > > > > >> get as much automatic public scrutiny, but whoever wants can have > > > > >> Google Docs email them any edits. > > > > >> Thoughts, everyone? > > > > >> Thanks. > > > > > > > > >> ------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > >> Erkki Lindpere<vill...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > >> Hmm... actually seems like it will be a long document, I've > already > > > > >> got several suggestions with 10 minutes of looking. Maybe I'll do > a > > > > >> complete code review for the lift-webkit module if I have time / > > feel > > > > >> like it. Where should I post it? There doesn't seem to be a > separate > > > > >> developers list. > > > > > > > > >> Erkki L > > > > > > > > >> On Dec 29, 7:58 pm, Erkki Lindpere <vill...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > >>> Ok, I'll collect some specific issues I have with the API over a > > bit > > > > >>> longer period of usage and post them as an issue in GitHub? Or > > here? > > > > > > > > >>> Erkki L > > > > > > > > >>> On Dec 28, 4:40 am, Naftoli Gugenheim <naftoli...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>> * there are several classes that have lots of methods in them > > that > > > > >>>>> don't all belong together. For example: S, LiftRules, I'm sure > > > > >>>>> there's > > > > >>>>> more. Some packages have too many classes as well. I think > there > > > > >>>>> should be a cleaner separation of concerns. > > > > > > > > >>>> Again, I think there is a willingness to do something about this > > > > >>>> but we need > > > > >>>> your feedback. How would you categorize the concerns that S and > > > > >>>> LiftRules > > > > >>>> address? How would you like to see that categorization reflected > > > > >>>> in the API? > > > > > > > > >> -- > > > > > > > > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > > > >> Groups "Lift" group. > > > > >> To post to this group, send email to lift...@googlegroups.com. > > > > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<liftweb%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > <liftweb%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com<liftweb%252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > > > > <liftweb%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com<liftweb%252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > <liftweb%252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com<liftweb%25252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > > > > > > > > > >> . > > > > >> For more options, visit this group athttp:// > > > groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en > > > > >> . > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > > > > Groups "Lift" group. > > > > > To post to this group, send email to lift...@googlegroups.com. > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<liftweb%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > <liftweb%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com<liftweb%252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > > > > <liftweb%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com<liftweb%252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > <liftweb%252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com<liftweb%25252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > For more options, visit this group athttp:// > > > groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en > > > > > . > > > > > > -- > > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups > > > "Lift" group. > > > To post to this group, send email to lift...@googlegroups.com. > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<liftweb%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > <liftweb%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com<liftweb%252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > > > > <liftweb%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com<liftweb%252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > <liftweb%252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com<liftweb%25252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > > > > > > > > . > > > For more options, visit this group at > > > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en. > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups > > > "Lift" group. > > > To post to this group, send email to lift...@googlegroups.com. > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<liftweb%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > <liftweb%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com<liftweb%252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > > > > <liftweb%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com<liftweb%252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > <liftweb%252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com<liftweb%25252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > > > > > > > > . > > > For more options, visit this group at > > > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net > > Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890 > > Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp > > Surf the harmonics > > > > -- > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Lift" group. > > To post to this group, send email to lift...@googlegroups.com. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<liftweb%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > <liftweb%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com<liftweb%252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > > > > . > > For more options, visit this group at > > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en. > > > > > > -- > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Lift" group. > > To post to this group, send email to lift...@googlegroups.com. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<liftweb%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > <liftweb%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com<liftweb%252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > > > > . > > For more options, visit this group at > > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en. > > > > > > > > > -- > James A Barrows > -- James A Barrows -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to lift...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
