From: Alex Waters <ampedal@gmail•com>
To: Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr•org>
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoin Enhancement Proposals (BEPS)
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 23:22:55 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAL0fb61B6bqGMhWtCgvy0xwfHQ_nvmhbb9uLJQWx3biENhVJNw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201109182104.45994.luke@dashjr.org>
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/ is a good reference if you're
interested in seeing how PEPs work in action. I would be more than
willing to maintain a similar index if that's what people want.
Something to note is that Python does not use Git or GitHub (AFAIK).
So we would need to update 001 to reflect the BEP involvement with
Git, or transition away from it completely (which I discourage).
My full-time experience as a project manager with Basecamp, Redmine,
Teamlab, Pivotal Tracker, SVN, and custom VC has taught me that it is
hard to find a good solution for the organization of the development
life cycle. Having examined Bitcoin for the past three weeks, it is
hard to discern the willingness to implement meta changes.
It looks like Git/GitHub is working, but not ideal for everyone. My
opinion is that there will always be a missing feature in VC systems.
My major gripes with GitHub are the lack of prioritization options,
voting system, and reporting/metrics.
Gavin has asked me to research various O/S projects, to see how they
are doing things. I have been focused mostly on organizing a pull
testing system, and learning the testing process - but I can spend
more time on meta organization if that is in demand. It would be
helpful to me if I could hear some feedback on what needs changing,
and how important it is.
My recommendation is that we continue with the current system, but
plan alternative organization voting around the time of 0.5 release.
This could be an alternative to GitHub, or a supplement, or neither.
Seeing as we are still in Beta, I don't believe there needs immense
structure until we approach 1.0. The PEP system is outstanding, and is
clearly a solid alternative/supplement to consider.
-Alex
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-09-19 3:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-09-19 1:04 Luke-Jr
2011-09-19 3:22 ` Alex Waters [this message]
2011-09-19 16:01 ` bgroff
2011-09-19 16:57 ` Gavin Andresen
2011-09-19 17:23 ` Alex Waters
2011-09-20 2:06 ` Amir Taaki
2011-09-23 19:45 ` Daniel F
2011-09-25 3:27 ` Amir Taaki
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-09-19 0:31 Amir Taaki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAL0fb61B6bqGMhWtCgvy0xwfHQ_nvmhbb9uLJQWx3biENhVJNw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=ampedal@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=luke@dashjr$(echo .)org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox