From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IxbdK-0006yu-Lf for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:08:19 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.2/8.14.0) with SMTP id lAT56kK8027071; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:06:46 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.2/8.14.0) with ESMTP id lAT54ewl024662 for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:04:41 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83C0A654EE for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:04:40 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -0.756 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.756 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.571, BAYES_40=-0.185] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dlL69JxGIED0 for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:04:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EB4A6536B for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:04:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IxbZZ-00083r-9W for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:04:25 +0000 Received: from ip68-231-12-179.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.12.179]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:04:25 +0000 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-12-179.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:04:25 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Features and documentation Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:04:20 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <20071127192144.GP4368@supernova> <474D53CA.7060101@gentoo.org> <20071128211405.GA11126@supernova> <20071128213319.09f73e89@blueyonder.co.uk> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-12-179.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.132 (Waxed in Black) Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: 09a97707-0b63-4ed2-8f42-71ac95054ddb X-Archives-Hash: 4bec72514bc25b5709ce1ca3714ca444 Ciaran McCreesh posted 20071128213319.09f73e89@blueyonder.co.uk, excerpted below, on Wed, 28 Nov 2007 21:33:19 +0000: > On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 13:14:05 -0800 > Donnie Berkholz wrote: >> Many of the replies keep asking for details -- details that don't >> exist. Apply the concept abstractly: things that need to be documented >> must have documentation available in the appropriate form at the time >> they're committed. OK, I can accept that details don't (yet) exist, but that's why the discussion. =8^) Hopefully it'll flesh out some of these details. > A large part of why many things aren't documented is that people have > very different ideas about what level of documentation is required; > this does nothing to affect that. Agreed. The current discussion on the metadata changes is a prime example. Obviously, there was disagreement on the level of documentation needed. A nebulous "document before change" policy can't help in such cases, as one side or the other's going to get very frustrated, either by "extreme" enforcement (seen by the one side), or lack of enforcement (seen by the other). The /best/ that could come out of such would be that it's as if there were no policy at all. The worst... people leaving because of "unfair" enforcement of a policy so nebulous they never saw the action coming, or OTOH, because Gentoo refuses to enforce its own policies. >> What remains unclear about this principle? > > It has an unpleasant smell of something a Dilbert-esque manager would > introduce after having read a "Project Management for Dummies" book > full of slogans and generalities. Leave it to ciarnm to be so direct, amusing tho it is, but that pretty much nails it. I've seen it said by some that Gentoo's no longer "fun". I disagree but honestly, ask yourself if there's a better way to ruin the fun remaining than by instituting policies so nebulous they simply /beg/ for argument over their application. The idea sounds so nice, something everybody should be able to agree to in principle, but that's precisely the problem, there's no specifics, so no practical way to tell where or how it applies, or what changes (if any) it would bring. Pardon my saying so but at least in the US, it's the season of politics, and we're seeing a lot of this vague "big stroke" pie in the sky painting right now. Unlike most of those, there's a chance with this one to get it nailed down to the point it's actually practical. (Bullet point suggestions for tightening down the spec to something "workable" omitted for brevity. Ciarnm put them well enough.) > You know... Practical things, rather than things that make you feel > good but go nowhere. =8^) As an alternative or adjunct to Ciaran's suggestions, perhaps this will be easier, tho not immediately as complete. Self-evidently if you are making the proposal, you believe there's a need for it and that it would change the outcome in one or more events in the recent and possibly less recent past. What about listing them, and how you see your proposal changing the outcome thereof. At least that would give us some concrete examples to apply the policy to in our heads as we discuss it. As I said, it's not as complete as the thorough evaluation Ciaranm proposed, but one has to start somewhere, and this would be one way to do it. OTOH, it's also getting very specific about perhaps sensitive events, while Ciaran's proposal would avoid singling out such events and therefore people by name, thus having the advantage there as well as in ultimate wholeness, once it's done. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list