Re: gEDA-user: Dev list [was: Random thoughts on the future interface of PCB]

[Peter TB Brett <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thursday 09 Dec 2010 09:35:53 Stephan Boettcher wrote:
> DJ Delorie <dj@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > If you want to become a PCB committer, the process starts by writing
> > good patches, reviewing other people's patches, and being involved in
> > design discussions.  When it gets to the point where the maintainers
> > are just checking in whatever you ask, you're in :-)
>
> Well, obviously, this path was tried, but requires too much patience to
> be successful.
>
> And then there is that closed gEDA-dev list.  How can the above work
> when the dev list is closed?

If I remember correctly, a major factor in the closure of the gEDA-dev list 
was that the signal to noise ratio became very low.  There were several 
people, few of whom *ever* submitted patches, loudly and rudely telling the 
people who *were* writing code and having ideas how their approach was wrong, 
the design was wrong, their ideas were wrong, how dare you change anything, 
you *must* do it *my* way, etc etc etc.  It got to the point that it was 
actively *hindering* development, because it was very off-putting to the actual 
developers.

Although the discussions on gEDA-dev are less frequent now, at least they are 
usually quite constructive.

Perhaps the time has come to reconsider the role of and access to the gEDA-dev 
list?  How can we ensure that it doesn't collapse into an unproductive 
bikeshedfest again?

                             Peter

-- 
Peter Brett <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Remote Sensing Research Group
Surrey Space Centre



_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user