[kde-guidelines] bugs.kde.org for guidelines

[Frans Englich]

On Monday 27 September 2004 20:19, Aaron Seigo wrote:
> On September 27, 2004 14:11, Frans Englich wrote:
> > Let's flip the coin: So let's say we first file bug reports when we have
> > content, as Aaron suggested(for him it ticked through it could be good at
> > some point, at least). So when is it ok to file bug reports? When 1.0 is
> > released? When a draft is worked on? How much non-related content must be
> > created before a statement that something unrelated needs work, becomes
> > true and useful? :)
>
> i think we can use our common sense and when there's stuff around to report
> against, we can do so. until then... well, common sense. i tend to believe
> we all have it, we just need to excercise it =)

Well, I obviously will need some training there. You'll have to hold my hand 
when I take my next steps with that bug database.

>
> > Come on, why don't we go for another round? I bet you all got spicy
> > things to say.
>
> oh, please don't. i happen to be the moderator for this list, but i prefer
> not having to do any moderation. it aggravates my sciatica.

Nice that this thread ended(not to my credit). 

Since this cozy little group surely will have more cute discussions in the 
future, it could be interesting to see how this thread turned out(according 
to my opinion):

It went quite well; excluding the end, it was straight to the point and 
reasonable arguments, although it had to be clarified it wasn't about using 
it as a discussion forum, and it also had to be outlined that the argument 
about the parallel to the gnome HIG was unmet.

The latter is rather interesting: I basically said "The gnome folks write a 
HIG, they use a bug DB, I want to do like them, because for them it works, 
and I think it is reasonable to compare to them," and proceeded with a clean 
question: "Why is it not reasonable to treat theirs and our situation as 
equal?"

What was the reply? What objective argument tried to prove I was wrong? There 
was no such reply. There was no change in mind, nor was there an explanation 
to why. However, Thomas cast his vote -- which of course is reasonable -- 
although it's not much to admire or work from. It's just an opinion.

I can only do a simplified speculation to why; somehow Thomas deem his own 
judgment is stronger than that of all the gnome developers, and/or that 
whatever possibilities to that he is wrong, is not worth the risk of having 
those bug reports created.

Thomas did another comment: "I find it somewhat disturbing that you feel that 
we are all suffering from mass-delusion and need teaching." When only looking 
at a certain part of the replied mail, he's right, namely this:

"I didn't markup 400 table entries because I find it fun, nor only for the 
reason that Docbook looks pretty. I don't know about you, but it horrifies me 
to arrange such a document, which is to be of an amazing detailness, in the 
form of TODOs and bookmarks to threads which are to be waded for their 
relevant content."

It surely is an authoritative since it motivates my opinion with the assertion 
that I have much experience. _But_, in the same mail I withdrew my proposal 
and basically said "I still don't agree, and here's why: <the authoritative 
assertion>". Thomas' last mail was "I still don't agree," but no motivation. 
That's two votes, with equal value. Same crap.

Apart from that, there's the argument no one responded; it wasn't knocked 
down, or said to be correct.

So, let's see how it goes the next time!


			Frans