forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thorsten Scherler <>
Subject Re: Forrest history (was Re: svn commit: r384121)
Date Thu, 09 Mar 2006 20:39:18 GMT
El jue, 09-03-2006 a las 21:18 +1100, David Crossley escribió:
> Thanks Tim, your comments are spot on.
> Tim Williams wrote:
> [ snip ]
> > Having said all this, I personally think that David's change was a bit
> > hasty.  We don't sensor anyone else's "live-site" contribution, why
> > would we filter our own fellow committer?  If Thorsten wants that to
> > be his tag line for his personal site, what say to do we have in that?
> >  It's his personal web site.
> It wasn't hasty. I thought long and hard about that.
> I don't see it as censoring. 

Well I actually do see it as censoring and like Tims idea
El mié, 08-03-2006 a las 21:19 -0500, Tim Williams escribió:
> Since we as the PMC actually endorse all other content on the site,
> maybe this live-sites page needs a disclaimer at the top saying that
> the Forrest PMC, commiters, and developers provide these links for
> examples and information only - we do not endorse any particular
> product, service, or information linked from this page?

> It is just the same as
> any change that we make to code or docs. If we see
> something that we reckon is not correct or could be
> improved, then we change it. If other people think
> that it needs discussion or needs to be reverted,
> then say so as we are doing now.

The live site links are provided from user of forrest. 

If e.g. nokia uses forrest for they site, it would probably be 
<li><a href="">nokia</a> connecting people</li>

If you change this because you think "is not correct" then nokia will
ask that the link will be changed back or removed. I do not agree that
we should change site tags from our user. To use your own words: Where
would we stop (or not)?

> In the past i have made other changes to this
> live-sites doc and to other docs that linked
> to sites that were not relevant. (Not saying
> that this case is not relevant.)

Removing dead links is one thing, changing site descriptions a *totally*
different one.

> Thorsten, don't take any of this personally.
> We are still a new project and need to set our
> direction. As before i am using real-life
> situations to mould that.

Well, lucky for me I am not soft-skinned and had enough opportunities to
grow it thick. 

I think we should not change the link texts from live sites.

> I see this current situation as an important
> aspect of community-building.

Well, or the opposite. See the mail from Maurice.

> It is not about the "history". Anyone who
> is interested can find that in the archives
> or we can try to build a concise timeline.

With information from the archive and svn/cvs this is *really* time
consuming. Further how should new people know what to look for? The
argument "it is all in the archive and in the commit log" is like
telling somebody looking for a needle in a haystack.


"Together we stand, divided we fall!" 
Hey you (Pink Floyd)

View raw message