Re: Hosting of the cookbook

On 2004-04-22 07:58:56 +0100 Anton van Straaten 
<[email protected]> wrote:

> [...] In the absence of that kind of feedback,
> we have all been moving forward.

If we don't know where the route to reach our destination is, how can 
we judge whether it is moving forwards instead of moving backwards 
while arse about face?

> I'm perfectly willing to entertain the idea that we're going in a 
> wrong
> direction, but to be convinced of that, I'd need to see alternatives.

I know you are capable of better than challenging someone who has 
described their current lack of time to build or research concrete 
examples.

> I'm
> really not sure what you're suggesting we should actually *do*.

How about:
1. agree that a published book is our target;
2. find consensus on what the path there should look like (ignoring 
its construction);
3. implement automated ways to measure whether we are on such a path 
and moving towards the target;
4. try to facilitate research that schematicians think interesting, if 
there's time;
5. walk;
6. run?

> Regarding output, I'm of the opinion that the cookbook's structure is
> likely to evolve even after it goes public.

We can revise things later if needed, but not even considering them 
means that revision will definitely be needed. If you accept that it's 
cheaper to fix now, then you trade a certain expense later for a 
little expense now plus a chance of expense later. I guess you see 
revision as fairly cheap later?

> Producing an HTML version
> should be fairly straightforward using wget, as Noel suggested. [...]

wget is flawed for anything more than a simplistic mirror.

> Are we deferring some work?  Sure.  But I don't think we're creating 
> a big
> project that wouldn't exist otherwise.

You are making certain a big project which might be avoided.

> My feeling is that we can play all of these things by ear.

So you won't discuss them in any sensible way now?

> The big point
> here is what exactly do we have to lose?

The big point is we lose time. Time is precious. Life is short. Man 
lives for but three score year and ten (or considerably less if 
chronically ill). If you are determined to filibuster and deny, then I 
am wasting my time on these emails even. Please be honest and write 
"no discussion will convince me" rather than asking or inviting 
questions which you are not interested in.

>> * What do we expect to see if one of the alternative
>> suggested development models is more appropriate?
> I think we'll know it when we see it.

You want not to discuss any objective measurement, yet you expect to 
"see" things like "a great deal of editing or policing"? Unless you 
just want a free hand to act irrationally, I think you are not making 
sense.

-- 
MJR/slef     My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know.
Please http://remember.to/edit_messages on lists to be sure I read
http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ gopher://g.towers.org.uk/ [email protected]
  Creative copyleft computing services via http://www.ttllp.co.uk/


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system
administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click