develooper Front page | perl.bootstrap | Postings from July 2000

Re: Voting/Decision making guidelines

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Tim Bunce
Date:
July 25, 2000 10:21
Subject:
Re: Voting/Decision making guidelines
Message ID:
20000725181518.S2952@ig.co.uk
On Tue, Jul 25, 2000 at 12:40:34PM -0400, Chris Nandor wrote:
> At 1:34 +1000 2000.07.26, skud@netizen.com.au wrote:
> >On Tue, Jul 25, 2000 at 02:58:29PM +0100, Tim Bunce wrote:
> >>
> >>I don't see such polls being regular events, or even used again at all.
> >>But at this early stage it enables a potentially very large amount of
> >>input (ideas, opinions etc) to be collated and efficiently prioritised.
> >
> >I agree with Tim on this one.  When we get a list of umpty-seven
> >"wishlist" goals/requirements/features/etc we'll want to put them into
> >some order fairly quickly.  A short period of discussion followed by an
> >advisory opinion poll should help to sort the wheat from the chaff.
> 
> I still disagree.  :)  I don't see what prioritization needs to be done
> anyway.  People will make their proposals and they will get looked at by
> whoever is looking at them.

Prioritization isn't a big deal, it's just a nice-to-have.

What's more important in the short term is an effective way to capture
what people perceive to be problems with Perl5 *without* requiring
anyone to propose a solution.

I'm sure that that list would be a valuable resource for Larry as he's
pondering the essence of Perl6. Which he's doing right now.

> I honestly don't think we will have a lot of "official"/"formal" proposals
> from the start.

Official/formal proposals for changes will obviously have their place.
But they'll take time to generate and the people expressing the problem
may not be the right people to generate RFPs. Hence capturing problems
and issues as a separate process makes sense. To me at least.

> We have a lot of people saying "yeah, xyz is cool," but those need to be
> translated into whatever it is that will create working groups.

Sure. The primary purpose of what I'm proposing is to capture the
"what's bad" and maybe some "xyz is/would be cool". It also serves to
deflect the natural desire to express them away from the bootstrap list.

> And I just don't think these will need to be prioritized; those
> who want to work on these proposals will work on them.  And then whoever
> decides these things will get it and decide on them, and I'd hope that all
> of them will be looked at.
> 
> Or maybe I am missing something.

Like I said above, prioritization isn't a big deal, it's just a nice-to-have.
If no one puts in the effort to make it happen then we'll just have an
un-prioritized list. I wouldn't be too worried about that.

On the other hand, I should would be interested in a prioritized version :-)

Tim.

Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About