On 27 Jun 2000, Andreas J. Koenig wrote:
> Disclaimer: please note, English is not my mother tongue. If in doubt
> about my words, please give me a chance to clarify before you shoot.
I think you're pretty clear.
> That's impossible due to a lack of resources. We are not a funded
> institution.
Then get more people involved is all I can suggest.
> Tk, Apache, and XML have their own module lists that are maintained
> separately and discussed on the respective mailing lists.
I'm aware of the latter two at least (I don't do any Tk stuff really).
> Yes and no. Yes, it would be nice if this list would be available with
> good advice on a 24/7 basis. No, you do not really need us, you really
> need cooperation with fellow hackers and you need to get an approved
> status in the long run (not immediately).
I guess I need to get on that module-authors list (any pointers towards a
signup. web searches are proving fruitless. and off-topic: where is that
damn advocacy list?). I've tried discussing some of these issues on
c.l.p.mod but the newsgroup (and all of them in general) is so cluttered
with noise and the vast majority of readers are newbies with CGI questions
that it seemed fairly useless.
> You are not going to go to the small claims court with us, are you?
Hehe, no, that doesn't seem to be very sensible.
> Informally we deal with it such that you do not own the namespace and
> do not have the final say. We'll seek your advice on everything
> related to "your" namespace, but other interests may need to be
> balanced against yours and we will try to never be rude and always be
> Salomonic. Sometimes this doesn't work out and then we do not sleep
> well (or not at all), but more often it workes somehow, magically.
That's certainly fine. I guess I'd just want to know if someone wanted to
upload a bunch of stuff into a namespace I know. The only time that
someone has wanted to this so far she contacted me first and we discussed
it before it went to this list, which is obviously the best way to handle
things.
> See above.
I really think you need to actively recruit some more help then.
> > 1. Nobody really notices that sentence.
>
> Are you sure?
Ok, I'm exaggerating for dramatic effect!
> You're right:-) Yes, we could add something like, "but don't take our
> words seriously because they really aren't true!", but wouldn't people
> be upset then? There's no way out. We are an institution and we are
> not an institution at the same time. If you know what I mean.
I think you (plural) have to work towards becoming a little more
institutionalesque.
> You have write access to the list. If we add the comfortable
> read-per-mail access, we have nothing but an ordinary mailing list.
> But we want a place to *work*. This is publically accessible, as to
> make our decision making process visible to the community. But if we
> start using it as an ordinary mailinglist, we will have to go
> elsewhere to get our work done.
Hmm, I'm still not convinced. Ok, there's this modules-discuss
list. Maybe some filtered version of what goes to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
should go there? I need to subscribe to this modules-authors list somehow
I guess.
> "Me too" (no sarcasm). I'd really like to see things progress. Your
> thoughts are very welcome.
Well, like I've said twice so far. I think the real problem is lack of
tuits. Solution: get more people to help. We've already got great
infrastructure with CPAN so I think its just a matter of available free
time.
thanks,
-dave
/*==================
www.urth.org
We await the New Sun
==================*/
