Hello! On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 08:53:35AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote: > On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 10:16:29AM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 10:08:23AM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote: > > > Anyway, I hope the solution I suggested above (adding the > > > documentation to my hurd-web page) should be good. > > > > There's no need to (more or less) hide the information on your user > > page. > > Let me remind you that it was you who turned the individual GSoC project > pages into user pages... :-)
That might be. :-) But as you say: the web pages are in flux, are easily refactored, and so on. > As I already said in another mail, the main reason why I ask for > "perfect" patches is for practice... Not every patch needs to be > perfect; but creating good patches is an important skill in general. OK, I can subscribe to that. > What bothers me more are discussions that are more or less on topic, and > yet totally unproductive -- like the circular discussion about opaque > memory etc. that took place here some months ago. Unlike with totally > off-topic one, there is actually a reason for the developers to continue > participating it such discussions; and thus they drain much more time > and energy than totally off-topic stuff... Adapt my habit of putting such stuff into the wiki -- unfurnished as it is at that time, and then refactor it later, piece by piece. This way there'll always be a place to direct people to when there's the need to get everyone up to speed on a specific topic, a place that already answers a lot of questions before people ask them again and again, and get them explained again and again, taking everyone's time again and again. For a lot of projects it even works out to have complete discussions in the wiki (of course, along the way refactoring what was written before) -- then that's already mostly like concurrently editing a document. > But if you think we should introduce a stricter off-topic policy for > this list, I wouldn't really object either :-) Well, not necessarily. If everyone thinks twice before beginning to reply to an off-topic email then that should be fine already. (As in: only publically reply to these that you deem to be interesting for more than three people in the audience.) Regards, Thomas
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
