Hello Richard (and all), The simplest solution seems to be reviving the historical mailing-lists pertaining to the Perl6 effort, in particular, the "perl6-announce" mailing list at perl6-annou...@perl.org . Daniel Sockwell wrote as much in his recent email. New subscribers can sign up at perl6-announce-subscr...@perl.org .
According to https://raku.org/archive/lists/ , "perl6-announce [is a] Moderated list for news of new lists, working groups, and so on. Summaries from the top-level working groups are also posted here." Presumably that includes reports from the Raku Steering Council. Yes, it can/should be renamed "raku-announce", but in the meantime why not use it? Best Regards, Bill. W. Michels, Ph.D. On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 4:19 AM Richard Hainsworth <rnhainswo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks to everyone that responded. > > It seems to me that the establishment of a common communication channel > by the RSC (Raku Steering Council) would in itself define the Raku > Community. Those who want to be a part of the community would track > (follow, read, contribute etc) the channel. I don't think it is > something that needs to be over-thought. Every channel has its > advantages and disadvantages, and there's going to be someone who does > not like the result. > > But the current situation of multiple channels of communicating is > obviously going to create confusion. It would be like having multiple > places for defining the same set of constants for a software project, or > some other analogy of duplicating code that should be kept in one place > and referred to, not written and maintained in multiple places. > > Also, if like-minded people have a way to share and cooperate, a > community will build. Facilitating the growth of a community will have > an impact on the acceptance of Raku as a language. > > Having multiple differing approaches to the same problem can be good - > not arguing with that. But if there's no common way to share information > about the multiple approaches, how can the different approaches be > compared? If they can't be compared, then the advantages of multiple > approaches are lost. And no one can be certain that their efforts are > being considered. > > It turns out - from comments of JJ and Vadim - that Altai-man's > initiative is a personal one. Had it not been late at night (for me) and > had there been an established channel where plans for community > resources are shared, I would have realised that straight-away. Instead, > I got annoyed and lost sleep (silly and unreasonable, but I am human). > > Daniel, I look forward to hearing from you. Altai-man, please send me a > link that I can catch up with what you are planning (I'm not so good at > tracking multiple github repos). > > One of the things I would like to do is to set up a way of doing > documentation that will allow for multiple languages to be possible, > which means that it should be possible to show the same documentation > file side-by-side in two languages, with text for each language kept in > a separate file, but for equivalent places in the documentation to be > synchronised. It would also be good to have revisionning history > visible, so that updates in the main text can be tracked so as to update > in a target language text. > > Regards, > > Richard > > On 14/03/2021 21:16, Daniel Sockwell wrote: > > I agree with the points Vadim and JJ made: There's a good chance that > > having a more official > > communication channel would _not_ have prevented surprise here, since the > > amount of progress > > on the a potential docs redesign seems to have taken many people (including > > me!) by surprise. > > I guess that's what happens when our community has "forgiveness >> > > permission" as a core value! > > > > That said, I also agree with Vadim that we should have a better way to > > communicate things like > > this, > > even if it wouldn't have been relevant in this particular case. In fact, we > > theoretically do: our > > website lists the perl6-announce list, which is supposed to be "low traffic > > (a few emails a > > month)". > > https://raku.org/community > > > > Looking at the archive for that list, it has been **very** low traffic > > indeed: the last message was > > > > sent in 2015. So we clearly haven't been using it, and starting now (when > > we're about to finally > > move on to raku-* mailing lists) probably doesn't make much sense. But, > > once we do, making an > > effort > > to actually use the raku-announce list seems like a good way to address > > this issue. > > > > Finally, Richard, in the interest of not taking you by surprise again on > > the same topic, I wanted to > > mention that, inspired by the proposed doc site redesign and your comments > > about the broader topic, > > I'm now working on a proof of concept along the same lines (because I have > > a slightly different vision > > of what a redesigned website might look like, but don't think I can > > communicate it without a POC). I > > hope to be able to share more details in the coming days. > > > > Best, > > Daniel / codesections
