Re: [alliance] Dead ?

[Presteign <starlost@accel.net>]

At 09:01 PM 10/23/00 Edwin Velds wrote:


>If the project is to survive, there must at least be *some* progress.
>Once there is some evidence of progress, more people will join in.
>However, I do think we need a slight change in strategy. I think you'll
>agree that we proved to be unable to let go of certain areas. When there
>was a discussion about the user interface, everybody joined in. When
>there was a discussion about the graphics kernel, everybody was there.

I found the UISK discussions were of great value, but we became mired in
endless semantic discussions.

>Which lead to a situation where we spent far to much time on the mailing
>lists. In the future we need more focus on what's important at this
>stage. Someone qualified should choose a few areas of focus to work on
>while we mostly ignore the rest. We should strive to always have
>progress in these areas of focus, if we can't maintain that, then I
>truly think that the project is doomed.

Maybe "empowered"? Daniel was right. We're just hackers. I think all any of
us can really do is moderate. I've continued to refine my designs unaided
in my spare time...I'm sure one of these days they'll we worthy of review,
but in the meantime, I'm always listening.

Since we are all living with time limitations, maybe we should try to
devote at least a little time to dicussion on these lists. I think a very
vital part of collaboration is the communication of ideas.

I must say here that some of my own research is leading me into areas where
I've hitherto stayed away from, for instance the realm of module loading
and object composition. I'm not a "kernel guy", but its looking more and
more like I need to be.

So..

My own writings about the user interface are reaching the point where I
need something to conduct research on, are we anywhere close to having
experimental functionality?

Eli.
-
Alliance:	http://www.allos.org/
Archive:	http://humbolt.nl.linux.org/lists/