← | Results 1751 ... 2000 found in all logged channels for 'f:diana' | →
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: that sounds like some very... charged time indeed
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: oh hey, welcome back !
(ossasepia) diana_coman: well, you are putting work into mpwp anyway so I don't see why not try to get more people to use it too,anyways.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: what brings you here, new_yh|17 ?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: otherwise those are still reading this chan's log anyway,lolz
(ossasepia) diana_coman: billymg: I meant literally asking on forums/blogs/wider
(ossasepia) diana_coman: hello new_yh|17
(ossasepia) diana_coman: !!up #ossasepia new_yh|17
(ossasepia) diana_coman: billymg: out of curiosity, do you plan to push this to a wider stage too? since you made the one for not-mp-wp users
(ossasepia) diana_coman: billymg: there is some leeway ie if I went full on to dig to list in detail ALL changes to code I ever made, it could have easily taken way longer, lol
(ossasepia) diana_coman: billymg: children and the like did not care for careful timing but anyways, with interruptions and all that, close to half hour.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: billymg: np; I'll try to get around to answering it too, will report how long it takes.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: spyked: feedbot seems to be mia.
(ossasepia) diana_coman will be back tomorrow.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: task:notes perhaps, no idea what works best for you there
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: you said you find the non-standard labels useful as they give you more detail; so make them perhaps something like writing:router so you can aggregate at level 1 "writing" or 2 where you differentiate between writing:router and writing:trb
(ossasepia) diana_coman: true, I finally figured out a wtf in the pile of transformations to set any mesh on any bone, so my poor beasts are not disjointed anymore.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: I guess I could use historical data to make sure it files any plans & reviews believably late though, can't have it unseemingly on time now.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: there's plenty for this tiny tot-bot to grow into but ahem, it's waiting on some crumbs of time to fall off eulora's plate, atm.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: yep; and no, I do not want to implement the socket protocol!
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: why not? it can call system on anything really, what's the trouble?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: ahaha, now that's an idea, yes; I'll have it log stuff to the yh.club mp-wp database too bwahahah
(ossasepia) diana_coman: I guess I could have it say that it doesn't talk to strangers, lolz
(ossasepia) diana_coman: myeah; and sold as such too, for as long as in the very least allowed to.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: lol; there's a reason (with a long history too) why I'm almost allergic to... intentions, let's say.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: now I wonder what might everyone took the plans for, even; lol
(ossasepia) diana_coman: to me it speaks of commitment, yes; I don't quite have other sort of intentions but I suppose it's better said "to see what you had committed to do "
(ossasepia) diana_coman: and ofc it helps in principle with coordination with others too; but only to the extent that it has anything to do with reality, sure.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: the plan is literally to see what you intended to do and then compare with what you did, learn from it and decide on the next move; not some sort of "form" to fill, nor some sort of madness/bureaucracy/dunno-how-to-even-call-it
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: and there's also nothing wrong with listing specifically some time for what I was calling yesterday opportunistic tasks, what.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: ... sorted or not yet, but you did apply yourself to that task.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: and then there is of course the level of detail - ie no need to go in super detail upfront when you can't even know that; but if your plan says "publish an article every other day" then it's a commitment you'll write one and publish it although yeah, flexibility as to what content, how long etc; if it says "sort out healthcare" then that is a commitment that you will work on that although sure, the result might be that it's fully ...
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: there is flexibility, sure - part of it comes from all the time buffers, part of it from the time permitting, part of it from the above "if context changes, so will the plan - explicitly though, even if it's in the middle of the week"
(ossasepia) diana_coman: it's never really worth it to go half way only anyway, so if it's a commitment make it be one and if it's a wishlist let it be a proper wishlist
(ossasepia) diana_coman: also, in that case, why limit to what seems to have a chance, at least go fully for it and list what you'd like to happen, what if it ...does? :))
(ossasepia) diana_coman: not much need for that, no.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: yeah, more of a wishlist burnt on the altar and forgotten too :D
(ossasepia) diana_coman: and that's a reason why I keep to it, too; sure, not idiotically without considering changes to the context but "given what I know now, this is what I intend to do" so if/when what I know changes, the plan can change too
(ossasepia) diana_coman: to me normally a plan is a commitment really: I intend to DO those things.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: what is normally a plan for you?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: what's the fuss over /re plan anyway?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: possibly worth a try anyway, why not
(ossasepia) diana_coman: the q re modifications and settings will be a pain to answer anywhere close really given the long history with it otherwise, huh
(ossasepia) diana_coman: billymg: I guess it works; not sure it will be much use tbh but that part is up to you anyway
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: reading the published review, it seems it was done (there isn't really anything new in there) but kind of done to you rather than by you, lolz.
(ossasepia) diana_coman will be back tomorrow
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: so you'll publish the non answers and I'll laugh at it, what
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: you're welcome.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: does it give you a clear enough pattern for Friday?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: anyways, will you write up and publish then today the review and plan based on the discussion above?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: and certainly re reporting, there's no point to indirect reporting anyway; the above was re jwrd (and still outside of scope so yeah, nothing on it now).
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: just one more thing: there's a discussion answering your question in chan, you should add it there
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: well, it doesn't sound like a lot of necessary indeed; tbh it all adds up to rather weird communications you have there too but anyways, that's certainly outside the scope of this discussion now
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: well, it can always also be "rather die than plan A", or anything else really, sure; basically whenever you don't like a pushed/proposed solution, the way about it is to look at the *problem* - that doesn't go away but yes, you can choose whatever solution you want for it, just choose it 200%, explicitly and stick with it, the usual stuff.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: btw, why was there no progress on 8? no "necessary" at all or what?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whether you have therefore a plan B/alternative or you just prefer to bury your head in sand about it is another question though.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: well, it's obviously a task you dislike a lot, got more or less "convinced" to add to the list as a result of relatives pushing for it but not out of your own decision that yes, you really, actually need it and moreover it turned out/promises to be a huge headache anyway so ...
(ossasepia) diana_coman: basically bureaucracy *is* to start with precisely the corruption (by means of "will do in form!!!") of what would be otherwise useful if done competently rather than for the sake of appearances /form only.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: that's true as well, indeed
(ossasepia) diana_coman: (since everyone is super special and flying by the seat of the pants is known to work best, given the amazing pants in question)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: ("it can't be useful, it's just bureaucracy!!!")
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: I suppose overall what comes out of this exercise today is in fact that so far you haven't really meant to use the plan & review in any way to inform/support your improvement really; sure, if it "happened to be useful", fine; but otherwise, shrug, just-as-well or something.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: so you found that out then and you can therefore standardise your labeling for next week/take care to use the exact same label, shouldn't be that hard either.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: also, if you think that the opportunistic task picking was due more to "oh, shiny" (or similar), you can anyways leave some time in the plan explicitly for unexpected/opportunistic tasks, nothing wrong with that either; but honestly, it looks to me like simply avoiding the ones you didn't actually want to do in the first place.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: re discarding do note that it should be explicit: those I am deciding I won't do and that's that; sure, you can review the list next week but for now this is what it is.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: and well, what was missing in this plan too (e.g. writing and #o time)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: the *directions* of what you'll want to do next week, lol
(ossasepia) diana_coman: and you should automate a report from that time logging
(ossasepia) diana_coman: from 20:45 my hour when we started to 21:48 now, ~1hour including the overhead of talking to someone else
(ossasepia) diana_coman: the review is done, the plan should now take not more than 15 minutes, and that's it.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: so from those two parts above you get your plan done in no time too; and then you can further add, if you really want to, some "time permitting/would be nice to" task but one at most, it's unlikely it will get done anyway.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: then you also have the tasks that weren't planned but got done - those show the more likely directions you'll want to work this week on anyway; so you use them to inform your next plan so it's closer to reality (+ doesn't miss again half of what is actually going on)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: let's see, you have the tasks that were planned and not done - those get a good long look and since it seems that they didn't get done simply because you didn't consider them important/urgent/worth enough to do, they get either discarded plainly without further pretense or otherwise pick ONE and decide to do it as in DO IT, no more thinking and whatnot.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: bah, that's not much of an answer either, lol
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: the fact that you got that done is certainly not a bad thing in itself, no; and there's no reason to consider it bad either, that's not at all the point; but you should ask yourself why and how the gap and if it's helping your or doing quite the opposite
(ossasepia) diana_coman: we are pretty much done with the first part, now on the second part of it.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: one point of the review is to actually look at what happened vs what you thought/planned to happen; another point is to give you information to decide on what you want to tackle to improve next.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: the change is in your approach, yes; the list of tasks aka the plan will get made one way or another depending on that, too.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: ("nothing! it's all fine, honestly!")
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: not necessarily; it depends on what you *decide* ie now the review shows all this; so you look at it all and draw some conclusions based on what you *want* to work on as changes for next week; this is basically the next question - what do you want to change for next week?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: ah, so it's more that the plan says what you'd find good and proper to do; the reality ofc shows what you actually *want* to do; and the review gets stuck most probably because it forces you to confront the huge gap between the 2, which is not an unknown but something you'd much rather not see ; esp not week after week ffs
(ossasepia) diana_coman: ("had to put SOMETHING in the darned plan at 1 am!!")
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: cool; why did you put it in the plan though?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: how about 5, the v.sh/vtools study?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: at 4, I can already answer the question as to why it didn't get done, lol
(ossasepia) diana_coman: because you obviously did, for whatever reason.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: the question is not why *not* script it, but rather why did you prefer to not script it, heh
(ossasepia) diana_coman: it wasn't burning!
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dunno, you hate scripting backups or you don't consider worth scripting backups for *that* or whatever
(ossasepia) diana_coman: you spent time on manually backing that up but not on automating the process - why?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: eh, that's no answer, lol
(ossasepia) diana_coman: (and having that automated report would possibly even help with doing the review to start with)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: btw, since it took 20 minutes to just add the totals up, it sounds like you could script that part already, it's a bit too much time to take for what should be an automated report already, pretty much.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: it's just a question, meant to simply figure out - why didn't that get done?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: now look at the items on the list that didn't get done and answer *why* didn't they get done? starting with the scripts that are still missing for 1
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: so on one hand the total comes to a reasonable amount, slightly less than a 9to6 job, lol; otoh, your plan anyway covered only 16 hours so it was for starters a sort of half-plan at best, lol
(ossasepia) diana_coman: so instead of 4,5,6,8 and 9, you did the set above, more or less opportunistically let's say, fine; add it all up and see the totals anyway, for starters.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: what does that add up to, as time?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: actually, hm, you worked in fact on something that wasn't in the plan, right? so what was that + what did you achieve there + add the time there too
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: adding up the time on those tasks that got done/worked on - what's the total and how does it compare to the total you set for work during the week?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: myeah, last time I tried to comment on mod6's blog I couldn't even find a way to do so ,ugh
(ossasepia) diana_coman: ok, so the conclusion there is to remember to apply that doubling factor at least, unless you are *really* sure you know the task very well indeed (as was the case for the trb patches which you clearly knew way more about)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: any idea why that far away on #2 or why it ended up taking way longer than you genuinely expected it will?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: eh, if no idea then set it double or triple for now.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: dorion: you around at all anymore?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: by what approx factor?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: did they take roughly the time listed in the plan or not ?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: lol, do I need to ask specific questions for each so you don't spin on "the full status, what might that include"?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: right; so then, here's the link to your plan for last week - what's the status for each of the tasks 1-9?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: did you do the review for the past week meanwhile?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: why does it even have to be anything more complicated than that, I have no idea.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: so then, decide similarly to answer a set of questions in writing on Fridays at 6pm UTC (or some specific hour); for one hour; publish the result as the review; I suppose we can even do that live now if you haven't done the review for the past week anyway
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: listen, it turns out that you managed nevertheless to decide and just come online at this 7pm utc daily, correct?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: yeah, well, nothing ever *wants* (as in naturally would aka in turn, easiest path/lowest resistance) to change, sure;
(ossasepia) diana_coman: basically uhm, why *not* be glad about something that is helpful?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: right; why not gladly?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: eh, because you don't decide to, as simple as that; just like earlier that "thinking about doing them on Friday and Saturday" was more likely "I did remember about them and about the fact that I should do them but..."
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: what do you mean?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: and answered.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: or can't you ? lolz
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: you can also simply *choose* either a. do them (and then JUST do them, without any further thinking) or b. not do them (and then idem, just no more thinking of that sort either)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: lru: ask for voice in pm if you are ever around and want to talk.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: I gave you voice via ChanServ, should remain on unless you disconnect; at any rate, just ping me in pm if you can't get voice otherwise; it will get sorted one way or another.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: try it in chan please
(ossasepia) diana_coman: !!up #ossasepia cruciform
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: you should be able to !!up yourself now, let me know if it's still not working.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: there's also a comment on yh.club for you.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: feel free to poke it with !s - it should not react/answer to anyone other than me, so far.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: nice; seems there might still be some bits to iron out on timeouts/errors reading from the socket but otherwise awk-bot seems to do the job just fine.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: !!up #ossasepia sonofawitch
(ossasepia) diana_coman: !!up sonofawitch
(ossasepia) diana_coman: !!up #ossasepia sonofawitch
(ossasepia) diana_coman: if any of you wants out of it entirely, just let me know.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: so I gather that it's lobbes and jfw that still find any use for it; I'll move the rest to hopefuls - you can still write or not write, talk or not talk, as you did until now but there's at least no need anymore for all this pretense of deadlines and wanting any feedback or finding it useful or whatever else.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: and talking of which, looking at the list there, it turns out there's lobbes who found the time to communicate clearly and stick to it, there's jfw who found at least at last possible minute the time to communicate what's going on, there's whaack who keeps saying that work would be nice but fun is more fun so there's at least clarity and then there's nothing from BingoBoingo and from dorion.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: so much thinking about it is probably what kills it in the first place and how it ends up pushed in the night; the bigger question though is - why do them at all anyway?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: write on your blog what articles you want, see if you find there any motivation to keep to it for real.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: drop that irc data collection whatever since it's clearly dead anyway, forget about it; on my side I'll consider it failed and burried, half a year was more than enough time for it, I'm not going to wait endlessly.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: whaack: by the sounds of it there's no need for all the trouble of an article on it - the review seems to be "took holidays" so that much you already said above; as to the plan - there was one you made last week but you made it for keeping up the appearances, nothing more so why bother making yet another one this week?
(ossasepia) diana_coman will be back tomorrow
(ossasepia) diana_coman: lobbes: works, no worries.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: hello lru , what brings you here?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: !!up #ossasepia lru
(ossasepia) diana_coman: trinque: yeah, self-voice for folks with a 1 is good; sorry for messing you about there.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: ah, right you are
(ossasepia) diana_coman goes to re-read the orig spec on trilema too
(ossasepia) diana_coman: trinque: ah, I thought !!up self is different from !!up others, hm.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: trinque: cruciform says he tried !!up #ossasepia cruciform and deedbot still said he could not up himself; he has a rating of 1 from me; is that not enough for him to up himself?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: what can I say, I kind of always erred on the side of - might make my own mistakes but at least they are my OWN ffs.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: there are at least two layers to it at the very least, first of all trust is one thing, seeking approval is an entirely different thing; second, trusting what one says does *not* mean that you don't reason what the implications of it are *in your own context*.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: trinque: can you clarify the rules that deedbot follows currently when deciding whether someone can !!up themselves or not?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: !!up #ossasepia cruciform
(ossasepia) diana_coman: !!reputation cruciform
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: try !!up yourself and complain in pm if it's still not working
(ossasepia) diana_coman: ahahaha, now that is basically perfect lesson
(ossasepia) diana_coman: eh, approvals and disapprovals - I have a full collection of both and they both do still 0 for me.
(ossasepia) diana_coman kind of doubts Taleb ended up eating nasty tinned tomatoed mackerel too, lolz.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: if A says that B is worth taking seriously, that comes with "for A, B is worth taking seriously"; now whether it's ALSO worth taking seriously by a C is a matter for C to decide and it's not always "if for A, then for C too"
(ossasepia) diana_coman: anyways, you have now a great article you could write - on the tomatoed mackerel effect (or similar).
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: perhaps for him it's worth taking seriously (or at least twitting to take it seriously); that doesn't directly translate to much for you/someone else like that though
(ossasepia) diana_coman admits to not follow twitter at all.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: o.O what did taleb twitter?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: how does the thinking go - what if I don't get the chance of tasting nasty tinned stuff anymore? lolz
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: lol! did they run otherwise out of nasty stuff? or why stockpile on the nasty stuff in the first place? sounds rather masochistic to me
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: sounds reasonable; who wants to sniff work all that much anyway
(ossasepia) diana_coman: eh, the "over it" is because there had to be a reason given, lol.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: I'm all right, thank you; and glad to hear you got better then, I gather you caught the virus in fashion there
(ossasepia) diana_coman: trinque: the !!down seems to not work?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: !!down #ossasepia cruciform
(ossasepia) diana_coman: it needs the chan name now
(ossasepia) diana_coman: cruciform: did you go !!up #ossasepia ?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: !!up #ossasepia cruciform
(ossasepia) diana_coman: !!up cruciform
(ossasepia) diana_coman shall be back tomorrow
(ossasepia) diana_coman: runs on old 1.3 of centos 6 extraction
(ossasepia) diana_coman: (it shouldn't reply to any pokings)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: sonofawitch is my experimental bot in ~140 lines of code total (and no shitty flasks and whatnots); I'll let it hang around to see how it behaves; feel free to poke it I guess.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: (in principle I wouldn't even mind it all that much to move it instead all to the filesystem - the point is all in ONE place - but there are some advantages to choosing db over filesystem, at least currently so I'd stick with moving it all to the db)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: for moving indeed ALL content to the DB*
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: in short, no, I am not pushing for some db-extremism, everything lives in the db, db config itself and circular definitions be damned; I am however pushing for keeping configs to a minimum, for moving indeed ALL content (that includes the blog title and the tagline(s), ffs!) and for NOT carrying blindly over "knobs and settings" just because "users are used to them".
(ossasepia) diana_coman: otoh looking at the current wp-config.php, it's short and sweet, with a bunch of configs for Wordpress to know where & what db it's meant to use; which yes, it's where it should be and fine as it is but I do NOT want to have in there now crammed all the obscurantist knobs from settings, no
(ossasepia) diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-04-09#1024061 - jfw, note that billymg brought up the things that are accessible/changeable currently via the UI, under Settings; and I went and looked there yesterday - there are things such as blog title, tagline, date and time format
(ossasepia) diana_coman: http://logs.ossasepia.com/log/ossasepia/2020-04-09#1024066 - heh, for fun and all that, I saw both approaches taken to the extreme indeed ("all in db!!" "all on disk!!"); extremes are extremes after all.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: but seriously, that sort of thing is not out of nowhere ie it's not like they are sane otherwise, only now discovered such bright ideas.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: ahahaha, that's communist traffic style (cars with odd number licence plates can travel on some days, those with even numbers on different days).
(ossasepia) diana_coman: plans and antiplans, what; (who said it all needs to be that serious anyway)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: ahaha, maybe set it strictly in the plan, if it helps? "plan sez must-not-write-today therefore WILL WRITE" ?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: jfw: heh, not-bad; I was just noticing in fact that your plan didn't mention any articles/writing as such, glad to hear it's just so-usual-it's-not-even-mentioned-in-the-plan-anymore !
(ossasepia) diana_coman: that being said, feel free to ask anything re use of mpwp, sure, I don't mind any questions on that, why would I mind them anyway
(ossasepia) diana_coman: and you know, if you spend time on it anyway, I'd say it's the only way in which that time spent is justified, too; not an empty "did lots of work on it", nor "bent to each and every user's whims and habits" but a very obvious "got to understand the *problem* way better than anyone else and therefore I have now better *solutions* than anyone else, too"
(ossasepia) diana_coman: that's pretty much part of "own it", too, the way I see it.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: I see its point esp when no domain knowledge otherwise, sure; but kind of ...insufficient I'd say; better than nothing but not going too far just by itself, that's all.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: and iirc some could get very bureaucratic and detailed and all that, ugh
(ossasepia) diana_coman: billymg: heh, no worries; my trouble with it is more that it's very limited and overall unclear if it's worth it really (ie you can get what they already do, but not what nobody even thought of yet, pretty much)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: (that being said, I still feel a bit sick with all the recollection of that area, lol)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: billymg: btw, all those shadowing and watching users and so on, I always took to be more about figuring out the actual *requirements* ie what the users are trying to achieve, not what habits they have
(ossasepia) diana_coman: ie make the trunk of mpwp so that I'm 2x more productive using it than whatever entrenched habits I might have, and I'll change the darned habits already
(ossasepia) diana_coman: to my mind the more important part is understanding (possibly better than users, yes!) what the software is meant to solve (and what NOT, ie scope!) and what's the most effective way to do *that and nothing else*
(ossasepia) diana_coman: ie you are saying there that you are stuck supporting bad habits just because they are spread widely enough, right?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: billymg: that doesn't sound very sane to me really.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: billymg: yeah, except mhm, are you aiming to minimise friction with people's existing habits ? ie if someone says they use it on Windows, you'll support that ?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: billymg: yeah, I know the full set of user interface design tools and approaches and everything (did several reviews of that area at various times too, fwiw)
(ossasepia) diana_coman: anyways, jfw, do you care to go into more detail on what you see as approach to minimise friction with maintainers?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: well, it's ~all theory so far since not much experience with V-maintainers as such, anyway
(ossasepia) diana_coman: ie make regrinds as painless as they can be, perhaps.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: perhaps add c. aim to isolate the core so that maintaining a branch doesn't involve a lot of intricate regrinds, merely a move this on top of that or the other manifest file
(ossasepia) diana_coman: billymg: the way I see "minimise friction", it means a. talk to people using/maintaining it - but this means literally keep them in the loop and weighing in, don't surprise them mainly b. provide the sanest set of default working structure basically
(ossasepia) diana_coman: billymg: mysql and the db structure
(ossasepia) diana_coman: because that anyway doesn't scale
(ossasepia) diana_coman: billymg: he has a point but I doubt that has to do with "add any functionality someone wants", hm
(ossasepia) diana_coman: I suppose I'll call those obscurantist-knobs, lol
(ossasepia) diana_coman: billymg: but again, one person's workflow is not really the way to decide on what's the right thing to have.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: billymg: indeed.
(ossasepia) diana_coman: that's a bit part of the issue there really - most of those are not all that useful knobs to start with, they are in fact circumventing-having-to-know knobs, pretty much
(ossasepia) diana_coman: billymg: hm, you know I ~never needed to update those? lolz; I tend to do it at install time via mysql and then let it be
(ossasepia) diana_coman: billymg: that q doesn't quite parse for me - what do you mean?
(ossasepia) diana_coman: and/or even maintain a branch with it, sure
(ossasepia) diana_coman: billymg: who wants to have that can add it to their own installation presumably, not an issue as such
(ossasepia) diana_coman: billymg: I wasn't even quite aware that existed really since I always use mysql, yes
(ossasepia) diana_coman: billymg: also, I don't get what has the UI to do with this? mysql sure, but that is needed for as long as the database is in use so hardly anything added.
← | →
Download hourly DB snapshot | Get Source Code