Well, its no JIRA :-) ... didn't see it, should be a link from the clojure.org page to it!
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 2:33 PM, Paul Barry <pauljbar...@gmail.com> wrote: > What's wrong with google code? > http://code.google.com/p/clojure/issues/list > > On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Howard Lewis Ship <hls...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> 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 >> >> > > > > > -- 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
