-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Rajko M. wrote: > On Sunday 04 March 2007 21:31, Sid Boyce wrote: >> Carlos E. R. wrote: [...] >>> I agree with you and jdd: I just have never used IRC and I don't like it. >>> I'm biased because till recently I did not have a permanent network >>> connection, so irc was out of the question. Also, what I write I do >>> slowly and thoughtfully, I can't correspond usefully on chat: I go back, >>> read what I have just wrote and correct it.
IRC is more like talking. How slow do you talk ? >>> I suppose many non English speakers would think similarly. I am and I totally disagree ;P >>> Also, I understand others will prefer chat: so let's have more than one >>> method. More than one method to synchronize efforts ? >> As an English speaker, I never have liked IRC either, it along with >> Mobile texting remind me too much of the old clattering Reed Teletype >> machines of a bygone age, they were old hat from the day they were >> invented and worse still, built and shipped. Obviously you haven't used IRC often either ;) > After all posts about IRC, I decided to make a list of my reasons: > - One has to pick up pieces of conversation that belong to him in a mess on > the screen which takes attention from the content. This is good suited for > chat, but not for serious work. Wrong. That's extremely efficient at getting serious work done because it's interactive and you don't have to wait a day before getting a reply as with emails. You can get it immediately. > - Once something is gone from the screen it can be found in the logs, which > in > effect lowers average speed substantially. Old messages are not important in > a chat, so this doesn't make a problem, but in bug solving effort it will > make problems. The point is to act on one item at a time. It's about being interactive, immediate, to get the right people into the channel and get the work done. > - Time zones exist and it is another reason against IRC Yes but that's exactly the reasons for the deficiency of emails for certain use cases. You send a mail, you get a reply 8 hours later while you're sleeping, in the morning you reply, and 2 days later someone sends a much better solution or opinion. > - I have to learn how to use it efficiently, starting with command set, and > previous reasons don't help me to see why. You just have to type the text. No special command set to know unless you're a channel operator. > There was a comment that email will be essentially repeating what is done on > bugzilla. > > Yes, it will be, but using medium where threading is supported which will > give > us easy way to see who is replying to what, which thread goes in right > direction. Bugzilla messages are not intended for discussions, and reading > beyond first few posts becomes quite annoying experience. But maybe the point about the triage is precisely to get it done quickly, not spend weeks to discuss it -- exactly as on bugzilla or using emails. cheers - -- -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ /\\ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFF7Jkzr3NMWliFcXcRAu8rAKC74BQGQMpfMT6ug2rkfZNwwruS0wCgp7wE NKq/GPuZ0A22bj4/qTn7rwQ= =fEKJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
