Thanks, Fritz.
I periodically get that feedback from a variety of my email recipients,
but it has two distinct disadvantages. First, it usually means I tend
to write longer emails than others - troublesome for some who have to
read them. Secondly, it means I spend a lot of time writing, editing,
proof-reading, editing, ..., etc. before I actually send the email.
I sometimes question whether I should put so much time into emails
instead of other productive (= $) work. ;-)
Gene
On Thu, 2010-01-07 at 16:31 +0100, Fritz Zaucker wrote:
> Hi Gene,
>
> you state a lot better what I was trying to say ...
>
> Cheers,
> Fritz
>
> On Thu, 7 Jan 2010, Gene Amtower wrote:
>
> > Been reading everyone's comments, and thought I would throw some
> > thoughts into the mix...
> >
> > If SO is to be a Q&A forum, is it possible to create entries for FAQs
> > based on discussions on the ML, rather than SO questions only being
> > initiated on SO? I'm thinking a Qx person should be able to enter a
> > question and answer at the same time on SO in order to maintain a set of
> > helpful entries there.
> >
> > Also, since SO is a broader tool than just the Qx community, I'm also
> > concerned about how you sort out knowledgeable answers from SO noise due
> > to non-Qx readers posting inaccurate answers to posted questions.
> > Granted, I see it has a "voting" mechanism for helpful answers, but the
> > Qx team can't control this voting, which can be manipulated. How do
> > they keep SPAM out of the answers? How can the Qx team control the
> > usefulness of the SO system to insure it's accuracy?
> >
> > Additionally, it seems that many questions on the ML go through a period
> > of discussion and info sharing before coming to a conclusion on the
> > issue involved. I wonder if the ML is a better forum for discussions
> > among the whole Qx team, while SO serves more as a place to find known
> > answers to common questions for those who don't want to subscribe to the
> > ML - i.e. build process configuration, theming, etc. Also, the one
> > entry in SO today provides an answer to a specific question on build-
> > process configuration, but it's not very complete and would ultimately
> > require a reader to locate the Qx documentation on build configuration
> > files, so there should really be a link to the pertinent Qx docs.
> > Without trying it myself, I would hope the SO provides the ability to
> > embed links to the Qx site in any answers offered.
> >
> > Also, maybe it's possible for SO to be monitored by the core team, then
> > have a link posted to the ML for needed discussion among the community,
> > then provide a final answer back to the SO database. This would keep a
> > lot of "noise" out of SO, making it a better resource for non-ML users.
> > It would probably be convenient to create an RSS-feed-reader mechanism
> > that receives SO questions and posts them to the ML with the link,
> > allowing the ML to monitor SO activity, while retaining the ML as a
> > primary discussion tool among the active Qx team members instead of
> > moving to SO for all discussions.
> >
> > All ML posts automatically generated from SO activity should include a
> > link back to the SO post, so this would allow ML readers to locate the
> > pertinent SO question easily, especially if there's an answer available
> > that will enhance the info on SO. Ultimately, keeping all of the extra
> > ML noise out of SO will make it more effective for the broader Qx user
> > community. I think we still need the openness of our ML discussions, as
> > they are among friends; meanwhile, SO is intended to serve more of a
> > public service that would not benefit from internal discussions of Qx
> > priorities and debates.
> >
> > Granted, all of this involves some extra legwork, but it might serve to
> > avoid fracturing the Qx support community, while providing the
> > additional improvements suggested by some wrt SO as a support tool.
> >
> > HTH,
> >
> > Gene
> >
> > On Thu, 2010-01-07 at 15:53 +0100, Tobias Oetiker wrote:
> >
> >> Today thron7 wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I guess, if you give SO a chance, looking for answers (also in other
> >>> areas, e.g. Javascript, PHP, Web application frameworks, ...), you will
> >>> find it very useful. You will probably find that both searching existing
> >>> questions, easily spotting relevant answers, voting and accepting
> >>> answers, as well as answering, cross-linking answers and building up an
> >>> easily accessible Q&A knowledge base makes it worthwhile.
> >>
> >> I agree ... I think for Q&A stuff SO is much better ... recently
> >> when looking for answers, I increassingly find that google direts
> >> me to SO and I am often rather amazed at the quality of the stuff I
> >> find there, so the concept does obviously seem to work quite well
> >> for other toppics, so why should it not for qooxdoo ...
> >>
> >> I am not saying the it is a replacement for mailinglists, but the
> >> Q&A type questions are much better at home there ...
> >>
> >> cheers
> >> tobi
> >>
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community
Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support
A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast and easy
Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers
http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
qooxdoo-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qooxdoo-devel
