Hi Glen Thanks for your input and a different view. I took the chat channell off the proposal, because I don't want that the project to be assessed on this single point. If a chat is useful for the followers, why not, as long as it is transparent and decisions are not made that way.
Best Urs Am Freitag, den 17.09.2010, 09:58 -0400 schrieb Glen Daniels: > On 9/17/2010 9:41 AM, Urs Lerch wrote: > > To cut a long story short: ALOIS is _not_ about a chat channel, it's a > > tool for security incident and event management. Since the chat channell > > in the required resources list was only a wish, I gladly dropped it off > > the proposal. > > Hi Urs, > > While I certainly don't think a chat channel needs to be on the proposal (for > one thing, Apache projects tend to just use freenode's IRC network), I'd like > to strongly reiterate Bertrand's points. Off-list conversation is going to > happen any time you have multiple devs working at the same company, living in > the same town, or attending the same ApacheCon. Real-time chats are often > the source of very valuable insights, and having an online "hang-out" spot > for a project has in the past been hugely worthwhile to the projects I've > been involved with, both for devs and users. > > As long as no serious decisions are made without consulting the list, and > someone posts summaries of all conversations that significantly affect the > project, real-time channels are fine. The point is that someone looking back > at the project from five years down the road should be able to really see > what happened by looking at the archives -- not that real-time is a Bad Thing. > > Thanks, > --Glen > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
