Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Hamish Greig <hgreig AT bigpond.net.au>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 9 Mar 2004 04:04, Eric Sandall wrote:
>
> Can we leave you as ISO Lead until we do find someone with the time and
> expertise to fill it? Wolfgang doesn't have much time and he was just
> stepping in for if/when you leave the ISO Team. You two could swap. ;)

I have already opened the position :), it is free for anyone to take up if 
they want to, It doesn't have to be Worf, but it should be someone with a 
long term interest in SMGL. It can stay open if no able person shows 
interest.
I only have the short term goal of making the ISO a  feature laden, polished 
product so that it represents your and my hard work in the grimoire over the 
last year.
Nothing after that, and no interest in long term planning.

...snip...
> All gurus should be subscribed to /all/ the grimoire updates as that will
> help keep everyone informed of what others are doing. Same with Sorcery
> (not the grimoire updates, though that'd be good, but all Sorcery changes,
> but I think this already is). And I would like to see Team Leads to be
> subscribed to /all/ (well, minus the administrative e-mails) Perforce
> repositories since it is important that our teams work together and
> understand what is going on in each.
Here's what I think, but it is only my opinion so do with it whatever you 
wish.
This is too important to be just a "should". Agreement from the developers 
that it is a good thing and necessary, could turn that "should" into a 
"must".
With all the discussions we have had on the perforce change "list", after 
some 
specific submission, it would be negligent for a lead to not be subscribed 
and ready to discuss the effect that change has on his team. 
A lead is not a god in absolute charge of a single product, a lead is a 
caretaker in charge of integrating his teams efforts with the efforts and 
desires of all other developers. Being unaware of the other developers work 
and discussions means that lead literally can't do his job, despite best 
intentions whatever he does will not represent the other developers. 

...snip...
> > > New versioning on the ISOs proposed to make more sense. Each monthly
> > > ISO will use the date created as the version (e.g. "20030407") and ISOs
> > > which meet a certain feature list will be given the standard version
> > > (e.g. "1.0").
> >
> > I would like to continue using pre 1.0 numbering for now.
> > Naming according to date (ie a snapshot) only seems relevant for post 1.0
> > when
> > all the features have been added and the rewrite done. Then a monthly
> > update
...snip...
> That's fine for now, we figured that the new versioning scheme would make
> more sense than the current one, but no sense in breaking stride now until
> after 1.0, though it'd be nice if we followed what was decided by those who
> showed up (even if late ;)).

Yes, I said I would "like", that means I will do whatever the majority wishes 
(no vote needed), but that the point I raised had not been mentioned during 
the meeting, and I thought it important enough to bring up.
Major changes like I am doing now should be numbered I believe, minor 
bugfixes 
and version changes (of spells and kernels in stable grimoire, after the 1.0 
release) can be snapshot releases.
Let me know if I should change the roadmap to be version-number specific or 
change my scripts to use dates instead of release numbers.

...snip...
>
> Everything is open to discussion, however, the Team Leads usually have
> reasons for the decisions they make, but it's always welcome to provide
> constructive questioning on the appropriate mailing list. If anyone has
> reservations, questions, or any comments about anything we do or say, let
> us know, either privately or publicly (preferred, unless it's vulgar or
> personal ;)) as SMGL was founded on openness and working together, the
> opposite of where we started.

I tried and failed. SMGL "was" founded on openness and teamwork, but my 
recent 
experiences remind me too much of the early days, when users and contributors 
weren't allowed to voice ideas or have input into something they used and 
supported with their efforts and contributions.


These are just my opinions and not demands or ultimatums. 
You may take them or leave them as you all choose.
I don't expect any response to anything I have written here, too many people 
see making any response as committing themselves to extra work or as taking 
sides and won't risk offending or insulting another person. I wish we were 
all secure enough that these "politics" could be avoided, but that is 
something for the new management to work on.

Hamish
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFATTBV8fSufZR6424RAjcMAJ4ic+JrZ/IR8xCGE/5ysMX8oTaYLACeJ9dt
X57ciiyLumGM/FS1/Hm+NFk=
=8rxn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----