Re: [9fans] List of companies that use Plan 9.

[Jacob Moody <moody@posixcafe.org>]

Thank you, I look forward to seeing your work then.

On 5/15/24 11:21, Don Bailey wrote:
> Sounds good.
> 
> D
> 
> 
> On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 12:19 PM Jacob Moody <moody@posixcafe.org <mailto:moody@posixcafe.org>> wrote:
> 
>     On 5/15/24 10:56, Don Bailey wrote:
>     > Yeah but that's the thing... "explained in this list" works while the discussion is being had. But searching for that and attempting to grok the discussion and the context of discussion at a later date? Not so much. Some centralized documentation should be used to make these decisions clear. In the commit messages is not sufficient, either. One still must search through the commit messages and identify the branch/context/etc. Plus, you have to /know/ about what you are looking for, if
>     something
>     > was removed. A separate document that outlines these removed/altered/added items, and the rationale/context, would solve that. Does that help illuminate the problem I'm discussing? 
> 
>     Who exactly is the audience here? If the audience is developers then the commit message is fine, if someone wants to know why code was changed that is where you put the reasoning.
>     People here like to work on code, less so on writing up whatever justification you personally feel is sufficient to warrant whatever we're doing. I already stated that I think
>     these days more rationale and notice would be given to people for a change that big, things are trending towards what I think you want.
> 
>     If however you (or someone else) wanted to do what you are asking us to do, which is spend the significant time it takes to demonstrably prove that fossil is _not_ busted
>     as we think it is and present it to us that would make for a compelling argument for inclusion. Perhaps what you do could become the standard for how these large changes
>     are documented going forward.
> 
>     Or if you'd like to start with a fork and/or raise your own community with this high level of standard for code changes I would absolutely encourage you to do so, if
>     that is truly a better way of doing open source then it will be evident. But right now I can't help but read this as asking us (people writing code for 9front) to do
>     more work to appease you when you are not interested in helping get that work done.
> 
> 
>     ------------------------------------------
>     9fans: 9fans
>     Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tad3dc0c93039a7d2-Me6bf30814627cb2d023dac80 <https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tad3dc0c93039a7d2-Me6bf30814627cb2d023dac80>
>     Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription <https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription>
> 
> *9fans <https://9fans.topicbox.com/latest>* / 9fans / see discussions <https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans> + participants <https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/members> + delivery options <https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription> Permalink <https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tad3dc0c93039a7d2-Ma45e0253b479829aece635bc>

------------------------------------------
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tad3dc0c93039a7d2-Ma98136cdefad2d3331c8a061
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription