Re: signal-to-noise on d-d-l

[Jeff Waugh <jdub perkypants org>]

<quote who="Luis Villa">

> > GNOME is bigger than just the Desktop release.
> 
> The desktop release is, at this time, effectively all of GNOME. QA, i18n,
> documentation, and marketing all focus their efforts on the desktop
> release. Yes, that may change in the future, but it hasn't happened yet.

This is merely a mistake (yes, mistake!) of history. It will be fixed.

> > Desktop issues -> d-d-l. Global issues -> g-h. If we remove some of the
> > 'power' of d-d-l, then the "oddballs" won't feel like it's such a great
> > platform for their crack. 
> 
> Great, they'll move to g-h. That really solves the problem! :)

I specifically commented on the division of power that would not encourage
this.

> > So let's set some standards and solve this with a sniper's rifle instead
> > of a hydrogen bomb.
> 
> Sounds good. What are those standards then? How should we have dealt with
> the stupid flag, evo, and scripting threads? I'm not trying to be a PITA
> here, I think it's the right idea, I'm just totally at a loss as to how to
> do this other than saying '[you are|this thread is] a waste of time' which
> is awfully arbitrary and at least at the thread level has been
> spectacularly unsuccessful lately.

Flags: Should have happened on gnome-hackers, as it was more of a global
"policy" issue. Thus, although it was not necessarily productive, it would
not have been seen as noisy as it was on d-d-l. I think it was one of those
"discussions we had to have" (Australian politics joke intended). From my
perspective, I was quite frustrated that I had very little support on list
from the people who had originally encouraged the post.

Evo: Rather than going back and forth with argumentation about marketing and
so on, it should have been made incredibly clear up front that "maintainer
says no, end of thread" (as well as agreement from the release team). If the
thread persisted, some sharp requests to end it could have been made based
on "maintainer says no", and then threats of being put on moderation and so
on. The thread did actually stop with my post about the maintainer decision,
but it should have happened earlier.

Scripting: Although I really didn't tune into the thread, it's a project
wide discussion that could have happened on gnome-hackers without being very
far off-topic. I got the impression that there was quite a bit of back and
forth argumentation going on - at some stage, maintainers or project leaders
should step in and attempt to finalise the thread, and if it persists, mods
could mention moderation and so on.

We do lie down and take these threads, as well as off-topic discussion, on
lists that are meant to be there for productive work. List maintainership
(or leadership) has never been a strong idea in GNOME, so perhaps we should
try to work on that too.

There are *very few* people who refuse to "understand their place" in these
discussions, and if they can't be cluebatted in a reasonable amount of time,
we can moderate *just them*.

- Jeff

-- 
GVADEC 2004: Kristiansand, Norway                    http://2004.guadec.org/
 
         "It's my head, Schwartz - it's my head!" - John Malkovich
_______________________________________________
gnome-hackers mailing list
gnome-hackers gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-hackers