+1
Accepting CAs by mail would be very welcome.
The impact of this until now is something quite difficult to measure, since
potential contributors maybe never voiced their interest and just quit when
they get to know the effort (or cost) required. But it probably makes a
difference when a pr
On Wednesday, September 19, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Michael Klishin wrote:
> Paul deGrandis:
> > 4.) What are the limitations behind changing the CA process? Can the CA
> > process be made digital (a scan of a signed CA, SSH shared key, OAuth
> > credential confirmation) or potentially reformed to allo
Stuart:
Regarding making clojure.test/clojure.string/etc. contrib libraries, does
it make sense to also move clojure.core to a "contrib" style library. The
idea here would be that "Clojure 1.6" is the bundling of all smaller
Clojure lib/contrib subsets, whose version number is always in sync
On Wednesday, September 19, 2012 11:43:45 AM UTC-4, Michael Klishin wrote:
>
> 2012/9/19 Paul deGrandis >
>
> My concern with growing the documentation on the dev.clojure is that it
>> takes a CA to contribute. I think we'd be better served as a community to
>> open up documentation contributi
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Andy Fingerhut
wrote:
>
> Kovas, have you used ClojureDocs.org? If not, I recommend trying it out. In
> under 5 minutes, you should be able to figure out how to add an example.
ClojureDocs is pretty nice.
Incidentally, I'm not personally endorsing any of the o
> Stuart, can you elaborate a little what better triage looks like? What are
> the current issues you're facing and what would make the process better for
> you? The ER metaphor perhaps isn't the best :)
> What are other ways the community can help get changes pushed along better
> and integra
Paul deGrandis:
>
> 4.) What are the limitations behind changing the CA process? Can the CA
> process be made digital (a scan of a signed CA, SSH shared key, OAuth
> credential confirmation) or potentially reformed to allow more of the
> community to easily get involved, especially for smaller
2012/9/19 Paul deGrandis
> For sure, I'd love to see an updated ClojureDocs-like system, hooked up to
> the build process and integrated into clojure.org. (Including all of
> contrib and CLJS)
>
This sounds like a good idea.
> Pairing that with ClojureWerkz-style pages for all the contrib libr
Andy - you're the perfect model of someone stepping up from the community
and making the situation better for everyone. I'm sure I speak for a large
population when I say, Thank You.
For sure, I'd love to see an updated ClojureDocs-like system, hooked up to
the build process and integrated int
On Sep 19, 2012, at 12:11 AM, kovas boguta wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 1:12 AM, Andy Fingerhut
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 9:01 PM, Paul deGrandis
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> 1.) Clojure.org should have a better host of documentation, especially for
>>> newcomers.
>> The only things require
> Currently I advice Clojure newcomers to not use clojure.org for anything, it
> is hopelessly outdated, reference-oriented and will only confuse them more.
> Unsurprisingly, this does not encourage newcomers as they think that many
> other things are hopelessly broken and outdated in this commun
Andy Fingerhut:
> On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 9:01 PM, Paul deGrandis
>
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> 1.) Clojure.org should have a better host of documentation, especially
>> for newcomers.
>> We saw from the Clojure Survey, as well as threads here on the mailing
>> list, that documentation is still someth
> 3.) Much like an Emergency Room, there should be a a fast-track to getting
> smaller patches approved and merged.
> This is actually not a problem consistent across all areas of the language -
> some contrib libraries and ClojureScript in particular seem to be getting
> this *just right*.
> Is
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 1:12 AM, Andy Fingerhut
wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 9:01 PM, Paul deGrandis
> wrote:
>>
>> 1.) Clojure.org should have a better host of documentation, especially for
>> newcomers.
> The only things required for someone to create a new web site dedicated to
> better Cl
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 9:01 PM, Paul deGrandis wrote:
>
> 1.) Clojure.org should have a better host of documentation, especially for
> newcomers.
> We saw from the Clojure Survey, as well as threads here on the mailing
> list, that documentation is still something on which we as a community need
Clojure Conj is nearly upon us. Last year there was a very positive
meeting to discuss and help improve the contribution process.
This year I thought it might be helpful to get some ideas on the table and
refined by the community before the Conj.
This has also been a common topic in #clojure.
16 matches
Mail list logo
