| 1 |
On Tuesday 22 April 2003 10:26 am, Dan Armak wrote: |
| 2 |
> The points you and other people make in this thread are known and |
| 3 |
> acknowledged by us. We are busily working towards a setup that solves these |
| 4 |
> problems. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
A lot of the unrest within the community and a lot of the annoyances the dev |
| 7 |
team has to deal with are the result of the community at large not knowing |
| 8 |
enough about what the dev team is doing. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Possibly they've already thought of and considered what I'm about to say, but |
| 11 |
I have no way of knowing. ;-) |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I think making the closed dev team mailing list (only slightly) less opaque is |
| 14 |
the way to solve this problem, and that doing so would help out both the |
| 15 |
developers and the community. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Here are my ideas: |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
1) Recruit one or more non-developers from the community and give them |
| 20 |
read-only access to the closed development list. Their job is to write a |
| 21 |
condensed summary of what's being discussed. (perhaps like KernelTraffic) |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
1.1) Possibly require them to remove any names from the summary. |
| 24 |
1.2) Possibly require them to summarize only topics, not the discussion |
| 25 |
content. |
| 26 |
1.3) Possibly require them to submit their summary for review. |
| 27 |
1.4) They could post the summary to gentoo-dev |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
This option, I think, would go a long way towards eliminating a lot of the |
| 30 |
opacity that people complain about and that causes a lot of the |
| 31 |
out-of-control mailing list threads. Plus it costs the developers very |
| 32 |
little. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
2) Open the archives of the closed developer list after, say, one month. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
3) And, finally, just for completeness, and not because I think it's a good |
| 37 |
idea: allow anyone to subscribe, but not post, to the closed developer list. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
Evan |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
-- |
| 42 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives