Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Andrew <afrayedknot AT thefrayedknot.armory.com>]

On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 11:05:58PM +0400, David C. Haley wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 09:33:39 -0700
> Andrew <afrayedknot AT thefrayedknot.armory.com> wrote:
> 
> > If we consider that a social problem it could be mitigated by having a
> > single 'main' maintainer.
> 
> That is a nice idea, but IMO this would seem to alienate a bit the people 
> that would gladly like to chip in here and there with maintaining updating, 
> or tweaking things as they get time.
> 
> Also, with this said one might consider human nature. If I am given spells 
> to maintain I may or may not begin to think they are 'my' spells. I would 
> hesitate associateing things directly with people in this form in avoid 
> making making things 'personal'. It can cause undo tension and stress IMO 
> than is required in teh development process.

I agree, the flipside is, people dont want to take on huge sections
because thats the only unit of work we tend to give out unless people
want to be general gurus, in which case we're back at the same toe
stomping social problem :-/ No one will maintain libs or utils.

> 
> This very chain of email can be used probably as a good example. Given
> this is your propose, your idea that you have set forth on this mailing
> list it has generalted quite a lot of replies and interest. I am sure
> that as you have read this you have seem some things that have caused
> you to sigh, or get frustrated. Perhaps that users that just doesn't
> get what you are trying to say, or some that just refuse to go along,
> rather sticking with what they have. If this has happened to you I would
> say that you are taking things personally. Which is natural when people
> critisize your work or ideas. Now, at this point I want to say I don't
> know if this has happened, it was merely an assumption. But, one I made
> to try and make a point. If anything you might have gotten upset that
> I would make such an assumption which would go to prove my point.

Actually Im just trying to summarize the discussion on irc and relay the
reasoning for doing things this way as best I can. I personally have no
vested interest in any of this (other than keeping /var/lib/sorcery/codex
mostly sane), Im just playing the third party arbitration. None of this
has frustrated me at all since Im not emotionally invested in any of
the solutions. Im probably going to actually duck out of the conversation
for that reason.

My solution for this problem (just for the record) was to just use gaze
maintainer or use the symlink forest to present the tree in a convenient
way for developers to see what other devs are working on, and use roughly
the same layout we already have.





-- 
__________________________________________________________________________
|Andrew D. Stitt                           | astitt at sourcemage.org    |
|irc: afrayedknot                          | afrayedknot at t.armory.com |
|aim: thefrayedknot or iteratorplusplus    | acedit at armory.com        |
|Sorcery Team Lead                         | ftp://t.armory.com/         |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Attachment: pgpIIE5uGfSwR.pgp
Description: PGP signature