Stephen Michael Kellat wrote at 22:14 (EST) on Thursday:
> Please do also disclose a summary of your sidebar discussion withStephen, since that discussion is public, I am pretty sure it's not an
> Richard Fontana as well as Claes Wallin that appears to be happening
> on Identica and other federated StatusNet sites.
HBR violation to discuss copyleft-next on identi.ca, since it's a public
forum. But I see your point (more on that below).
Meanwhile, my understanding of the identi.ca conversation is this:
* Pam Chestek got copyleft-next off GitHub, and nothing there told her
GitHub wasn't the canonical location for participation (this should
be fixed immediately, IMO. I realize the README says it, but there
should be something in big bold letters on GitHub: THIS IS A MIRROR
ONLY. DO NOT SUBMIT PULL REQUESTS AND ISSUES HERE. USE MAILING LIST
AND GITORIOUS [or whatever solution Fontana decides].
Ideally, the pull request/issue tracker should be turned off.
* Pam realized, probably after getting the checkout and seeing the
readme, that Gitorious was preferred.
* Pam couldn't submit changes via Gitorious (at that point, presumably
her tracking branches were all pointed at GitHub, which was probably
part of the problem).
* Fontana opened an issue on GitHub to collaborate with Pam on the
issue she raised.
* I theorized that this marked a distributing occurrence, since GitHub
instance of copyleft-next seemed to be active again instead of just being a
mirror. I complained heavily to Fontana about it, and Fontana
countered with what I believed were incorrect analogies to GPLv3
drafting process (i.e., I thought copyleft-next was trying to avoid
those, anyway!)
Pam and Fontana, is that summary accurate from your point of view?
This is a good point. I'll try to avoid using identi.ca to discuss
> I am minded at this point to ask that the folks who find the need to
> use GitHub please make themselves heard on list within our primary
> record of communications. The mailing list has functioned quite well
> as a de facto issue tracker thus far and I do not enjoy the notion of
> having to chase down discussion across multiple fora.
copyleft-next in future.
I do agree that having to follow GitHub, identi.ca, Gitorious, and this
mailing list is annoying. While HBR doesn't prohibit it, I suggest we
all work to restrain ourselves to use *only* the mailing list and
Gitorious and nothing else for now, to avoid people having to track so
many fora.
I have *so* little time for copyleft-next, thus I really am swayed by
Stephen's point here. I had assumed that checking the git log from
Gitorious and reading mailing list traffic would be adequate any time I
had a moment to check in with copyleft-next. If that's not true:
because of use of GitHub, identi.ca, or any other fora being used, we
may want to nip it -- not because it's an HBR violation or even because
one of those solutions is proprietary (identi.ca isn't after all), but
because it makes it difficult to follow a conversation across so many
fora.
I hadn't realized how big of a problem that is for people who have
limited time for the project until Stephen raised it. Thanks for
raising that point.
--
-- bkuhn
_______________________________________________
copyleft-next mailing list
copyleft-next@lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/copyleft-next