Re: HERESY: *ONE* mailing list

On Tue, Jul 25, 2000 at 10:59:41PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 09:41 AM 7/26/00 +0900, Simon Cozens wrote:
> >On Tue, Jul 25, 2000 at 08:35:04PM -0400, Adam Turoff wrote:
> > > The one idea that I left the p5p meeting with is that we need *more*
> > > responsibility, *more* chairpeople/pumpkings and *more* direction.
> >
> >You cannot manufacture order out of chaos by adding managers. :)
> 
> I'll disagree. The whole point of managing *is* to manufacture order out of 
> chaos. 

If I can speak to Simon's point, adding "managers" as managers tends
to make the Perl6 scheme being proposed more like a day job and less
like a fun endeavor.  In a push to be serious, we can't engineer the
fun out of the equation.

At some point, chaos is neither fun nor productive.  Adding random
management into the mix doesn't necessarily lead to less chaos or
more fun, either.

The answer is in the details somewhere.  I haven't seen the one true 
community structure everyone is happy with come up yet.

> I'd still split it into several main lists--language design is mostly 
> separate from embedding API design, which is mostly separate from 
> PR/advocacy issues, which is mostly separate from QA things. 

PR/Advocacy is a separate space.

QA needs to be tightly integrated into the language design as well as 
the internals.  I can make a similar case for documentation.

The lines are still fuzzy at the moment, and I'm beginning to question
the wisdom of splitting an API discussion away from a core discussion,
even with weekly updates to one central area.  Aspects of documentation
are core issues as well.  While some documentation issues are discrete
and separable, others aren't.

> Whether this is feasable is another issue entirely. 

That's the problem in a nutshell.  

Z.