I'm always a fan of using a real issue tracking system; I'd love to
see Clojure using JIRA to track what's going on, and what's coming up,
in a public and visible way. It'll make it feel more like a community
project, less like a one-man show (I deal with that perception all the
time on Tapestry).

I actually have a stable, permanent JIRA instance all set up:
http://tapestry.formos.com/jira.  It would be a few minutes work to
set up a clojure project and get everyone registered.




On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Rich Hickey <richhic...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Jan 23, 4:19 pm, Jason Wolfe <jawo...@berkeley.edu> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Jason Wolfe <jawo...@berkeley.edu>
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >> OK, if these are not wanted in core right now, will anyone sign off
>> >> for adding them to clojure.contrib?
>>
>> > Well, *I* want these changes you've proposed in the core, but of
>> > course, I'm not in charge.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> >  I guess the real question is, what is the
>> > process to ensure that Rich sees and considers a potential core
>> > improvement like this?  I think the main mechanism for this is to post
>> > it as an "issue" on google code, but I'm not certain whether you're
>> > supposed to post an issue unless he's seen the newsgroup thread and
>> > says, "Yes, that sounds good, please post it as an issue."  But if he
>> > misses the thread for some reason, that will never happen.  So it's a
>> > bit of a catch-22.  Anyway, maybe someone can clarify the procedure.
>>
>> Yes, it is not supposed to be posted as a core issue unless Rich OK's
>> it here.
>>
>> I just had a discussion about just this "meta"-issue on IRC.  Chouser
>> says that Rich still reads every message on the group.  See also the
>> further-up discussion in [1] for more procedural details, where it is
>> also suggested that an explicit sign-off here should be required for
>> posting clojure.contrib issues.
>>
>> [1]http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/msg/657291bc62c48f32?hl=en
>>
>> Anyway, I'm feeling quite frustrated and won't try to push this (or
>> any other) issue further.  I know Rich and the team are very busy, but
>> it really saps my will to contribute when I have to keep pushing to
>> get an authoritative answer (be it yes or no) on even (what seems to
>> me to be) a fairly uncontroversial change like this one, or [2].
>>
>> [2]http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/browse_thread/thread/5d11bc0da...
>>
>> Sorry for taking your question as a jumping off point for whining
>> about not getting attention.  I guess my short answer is: the policy
>> is fairly clear, but its current implementation may be discouraging
>> potential contributors like myself.
>>
>
> I appreciate your desire to contribute, but Clojure is not just about
> your needs. You have flooded the group with every idea you have, some
> are bugs (important), some are good ideas, some not, but there are
> simply too many to address at the rate you are producing them. In
> addtion, sometimes you've made issues, and often blogged about them.
> So, for #2 the issue was addressed and you found out about it that
> way. I can't answer you (or anyone) in every forum.
>
> I'd advise you to be more patient, build up a small library of helper
> functions you use frequently, make contributions of the most important
> of them to contrib. Clojure doesn't change that fast and it's not
> going to. I like to consider things and I can't address every
> suggestion as it is made.
>
> Separate out the important things (like potential bugs) so they get
> more attention.
>
> As for these:
>
>  - 0-arg distinct? returns true, not an exception (so (apply distinct?
> nil) = true)
>
> Not now, will consider.
>
>  - rewrite concat so that (apply concat seq) doesn't evaluate the
> first three elements of seq
>
> No, may fall out of streams work.
>
>  - make every?, not-every?, some, not-any? take multiple seq args like
> map, i.e., (every? not= [1 2 3] [2 3 4])
>
> No.
>
>  - allow arguments to merge-with after the first to be lists of
> pairs.
>
> No.
>
> Rich
>
> >
>



-- 
Howard M. Lewis Ship

Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to