On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 01:56:42PM -0700, Neil Conway wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 12:15 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Well, either people post the changes publically or I trust a few people.
> > I don't trust everyone or the TODO becomes a dumping ground, which I am
> > afraid might happen with a wiki that anyone can update.
>
> I think that's preventable, especially if we require logins to edit the
> wiki: while people are free to add content, others can clean up new
> content and remove dubious additions. Besides, I think the TODO list is
> speculative by nature: there are plenty of vague or half-baked ideas on
> the current TODO list, for example.
>
> For those who haven't seen it, I think the GCC Wiki is a good model:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki
>
> Personally I'd like to see us move toward maintaining the TODO list and
> similar developer-oriented information primarily on a wiki.
Another possibility for "questionabl" TODO items is to allow users to
vote on them. Bugzilla (just as an example) allows users to vote on
bugs, but they're only given a limited number of votes, so they have to
decide what's most important to them.
There's also the idea of "TODO purgatory" that I mentioned earlier.
The issue I'm thinking of here is that there are things that would be
very beneficial for users to have but that much of -hackers won't care
about. Right now, we don't do a very good job of identifying those
things (IMHO).
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
