OK, seems this should be a separate application, not done in the TODO
list, and I am not willing to take on that additional workload.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Josh Berkus wrote:
> Bruce,
>
> > What happens now is that someone says they want to work on X, and the
> > community tells them that Y might be working on it, and Y gives us a
> > status.
> >
>
> What happens now is:
>
> A starts working on X.
> 3 months pass
> B comes to hackers, spends hours reading the archives, doesn't find X
> (because they know it by a different name), comes to -hackers and asks
> "Is anyone working on X?"
> B waits for 2 weeks without an answer and repeats the question.
> Hackers E, F and G reply "yes, someone is but I don't remember who,
> search the archives for keyword X"
> B searches again, finds original post.
> B e-mails A and gets no response.
> B finally offers to take over X
> Hackers M, L, and N say "sure, but read the archives for spec info"
> B reads more archives for several hours.
>
> There's a LOT of unnecessary overhead in that process: having a simple
> web app that lists who claimed what todo and when, any status updates if
> they've voluntarily provided them, and links to archive discussions, we
> could reduce the above to a 3-step process making it vastly easier for
> new hackers to get started.
>
> To be clear: I'm not trying to solve a problem for existing hackers, for
> whom the existing system works fine. I'm trying to solve a problem for
> two groups: new hackers, and users who want to check the plans for new
> features without combing through the archives.
>
> I'll also point out that having an annotated TODO with regular updates
> would lessen the pressure we get from some parties for a roadmap.
>
> --Josh
-- Bruce Momjian bruce@momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
