Re: Mime Type Analysis

[Maciej Stachowiak <mjs eazel com>]

Kurt Granroth <granroth kde org> writes:

> Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> > David Faure <david mandrakesoft com> writes:
> > > I am sometimes, but I think it's better if those discussions
> > > remain public, so that others can participate. For instance, I was
> > > only planning to explain a bit better the gray areas in Kurt's
> > > initial post (like the user profile), and I end up trying to
> > > design a solution, but I was hoping he would be the one working on
> > > that :-)
> > 
> > It's fine to keep things by email, IRC is just easier for getting
> > ideas across sometimes due to the lower latency.
> > 
> > Since you are the guy in charge of the KDE mime type implementation, I
> > think it's even better for you to work with me on coming up with a
> > common design than for Kurt to do it.
> > 
> > Standards work best when the people who will be implementing them
> > create them.
> 
> I'd like to clarify a few things.  First, while David is certainly the
> KDE mimetype god, I am not exactly a newbie in the area.  I am more
> then capable of implementing any standard as well as help create them.
> As I am now devoting part my time to GNOME-KDE compatability issues
> (and this is one of them), I will also have time to do this.

Kurt, I'm glad you're spending time on this. I didn't mean to
denigrate your ability to do the work on this; I only meant what you
said, that if David also works on this, it's even more helpful than
just you doing it.

> That said, David's experience would definitely make him a *better*
> choice if only one person had to do it.  His knowledge of our current
> system is 100% complete while I would have to search through the code
> for a few hours to get to that level (or maybe not that long.. I'm
> pretty familiar with most of the KDE infrastructures).
> 
> The reason I am mentioning all this, though, is that I seriously doubt
> that David has the time to devote to this when somebody else is
> willing to do the dirty work.  To better maximise all of our time, it
> might be best if we do all discussion in a public forum (this one
> works for now) so that whoever is available can pick up the ball.  If
> it turns out that David can find the time, then I will graciously cede
> all control and move on to another project on my endless TODO list.

I don't care who implements it really, but I do want to be talking to
the people who will be implementing the standard and maintaining the
code. I have a couple more things to add.

The problem is that coming up with a standard by sending long messages
to lists with no side channel for discussing specific points is very
tiring sometimes; to me at least it would be nicer to work out
proposed solutions to holes in the previous standard and then post
something on the list with a rationale, than to have to go back and
forth in email a lot, especially if we could create a list of open
issues ahead of time.

I'm open to speaking with however many people are interested, by IRC,
teleconference or whatever. But we can keep it on email if that's more
comfortable for others. Things seem to be working fine by email.

 - Maciej