On Mon, 28 Aug 2000, Eric Armstrong wrote:
> But there is also a qualitative distinction between the immediate design
> and many other possible avenues of approach. Here's the rules I suggest:
> * If the concept for the initial design isn't clear, then post
> material to unrev-II and badger ohs-dev for an understandable
> summary, so it will be clear when posting to ohs-dev is appropriate.
> * If the initial design *is* clear, then keep qualitatively different
> topics on unrev-II.
I think your rules sound great. I'd propose moving off of unrev-ii
altogether, and using a different list to accomplish your
suggestions. unrev-ii list was created for the Colloquium, not
for OHS development, and it inherits some problems as a result
(i.e. different list charter, license issue Paul has repeatedly
raised, etc.). Rather than attempt to redefine unrev-ii's purpose, I
think it would be easier to say that all OHS-related discussion should
occur on ohs-* lists. It would have the added organizational benefit
of having all OHS related mailing lists on the bootstrap.org site,
rather than having several lists spread across a number of sites.
An firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list was created a while back, and we
can use that for longer term and other more general OHS discussion. Or,
if there's a more appropriate name than ohs-talk, we can adopt that and
create a new list.
Bottom line is that we need a more focused forum for discussion of short
term development issues. John calls it "tunnel vision"; I call it focus.
-- +=== Eugene Eric Kim ===== email@example.com ===== http://www.eekim.com/ ===+ | "Writer's block is a fancy term made up by whiners so they | +===== can have an excuse to drink alcohol." --Steve Martin ===========+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue Aug 21 2001 - 17:57:54 PDT