On 10/05/15 19:53, Mark Waddingham wrote:
It might be easier if, for goofy types like myself, those "things" at
that web address were explained in some way that we could understand.
Well, I think 'trust' comes in here to a certain degree - i.e. if you
trust that we are doing the right thing, and are doing so for the
benefit of the 'community as a whole' then you'd probably be less
concerned about the technical details (unless they directly impact you
in something you are doing).
Ultimately the github presentation of the source is an important means
of communication which any body working directly on the product have
so there is only so far we could take it in terms of explaining each
pull request in a more 'generally understandable' way. (However, I do
agree that our pull requests and commit history do not have overall
enough detail in them - this is something we are working to change as
we evolve as an open-source project and also with a larger engineering
team).
The question is, then, what information would be useful and how can we
present it in such a way that it doesn't actually detract from the
other 'doing' too much. (e.g. We could explain each minor bugfix in
depth, but as a result fix less bugs - the balance here is really
important).
Point taken.
Richmond.
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
