[spec] Using a gitlab (Was: Regarding the proposal to remove status code 11

Bradley D. Thornton Bradley at NorthTech.US
Mon Mar 15 09:03:27 GMT 2021

On 3/14/2021 1:08 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 13, 2021 at 08:30:19PM -0700,
>  Thomas Frohwein <tfrohwein at fastmail.com> wrote 
>  a message of 79 lines which said:
>>> Thirdly and lastly, about Gitlab. I strongly dislike the fact that
>>> discussions which can have quite an impact on all Gemini users are
>>> happening in Gitlab issues; to stay up-to-date on all these
>>> requires regularly going through multiple webpages, and to comment
>>> requires a Gitlab account! I think this is a mistake.
>> Agree, even with this one.
> Group work is funny. When the discussion on the specification was on
> the mailing list, everybody complained that it made a lot of messages,
> that it was difficult to follow, to know for sure what was decided or
> not, etc. (I did share some of these complaints but not all; many
> problems were simply because some people do not use some features of
> their email client, such as threading and full-text search.) Nobody
> defended the mailing list and asked for the specification discussion
> to remain there.
> Now that we moved to another system, people (but may be not the same)
> complain about the new system. My (long) experience with "groupware"
> is that it is impossible to find a solution that will please
> everyone. 

Yes, it is the nature of an email list to become noisy when the
population and popularity of that list increases.

So the WG style discussions for finalizing the Gemini spec have migrated
to a platform which is [also] well suited for such purposes. As a
platform, it is Perhaps even better equipped to compartmentalize and
focus upon each particularity that needs focused attention.

Issues can be isolated and related discussions can remain on topic there
in the issue tracker much more coherently.

I don't see how lamenting the move to a Gitlab issue tracker system
elswhere (here on this list) is going to facilitate the discussions
occuring there, and to be certain, one can participate there if those
are important issues for them or they can choose not to participate.

As far as what I've observed (I'm still going back over all of the
archives on my mail server) with respect to people leaving the list due
to complaints related to traffic, I've noticed that most of those were
folks that were of the, let's say, 'user' class, who found the nebulous
and arcane joo joo black arts of the core development and
standardization process too overhwelming to enjoy.

I've also noticed, not as many, but several technically minded folks
leaving citing disdain for banter and discussion that isn't specifically
related to the canonization of Gemini protocol specifications and the
development cycle of software.

I think this list will evolve over time to be a more user centric
resource medium with the more occasional announcements related to core
dev topics, with a lot more of the development related discussions
taking place in arenas more centric to actual development.

That's just kinda what I figure. But it does little to no good to
complain here about a discussion taking place elsewhere when anyone's
invited - if it is something important to a person, it stands to reason
that they'll make their positions heard where the majority of such
impactful discussions are currently taking place.

In the end, it really is a matter of what, "Is, is", and right now,
those matters are being *decided* elsewhere.

I hope that helps :)

Kindest regards,

Bradley D. Thornton
Manager Network Services
TEL: +1.310.421.8268

More information about the Gemini mailing list