lynx-dev Re: nature of list (was: cmdline sup/#'d form inputs)

[John Hawkinson]

This is hopeflly my last message to the list on this topic. No matter how
many people continue to send mail about it, to the list or to me personally
or both, I'm not going to bother responding to the list unless it's really
useful. I'm only bothering this time because multiple people are sending me
these missives.

In message <address@hidden>, Heather Stern writes:

>I say all the way through to the bottom before you comment upon it.  I
>believe I can shed some light on why the annoyance about CCs to you.

It's not rocket science.

>> You don't seem to address my point. If the lynx project wishes to
>> assert that lynx-dev is not an address for the submission of bug
>> reports and feature contributions by non-members, then the PROBLEMS
>> section of README should make that clear.
>
>Incorrect-amundo - it is the one and only correct location as far as I
>know;

You used the word "incorrect" without specifying what is incorrect.  I
can't come up with any plausible interpretation.

>but we found it distressing that you are so eager to contribute
>valuably (by generating code) without wanting to stay EVEN BRIEFLY to
>hear the resulting discussion.

You jump to conclusions, in a seemingly erroneous fashion. Of course I
wanted to hear the resulting discussion, otherwise I would not have
requested to be cc'd. What I did not want was to see all the rest of the
lynx-dev discussions that don't really concern me. The latter may or may
not be a reasonable goal. Let us not discuss it.

>Um, in one message you asked someone what authority they had in the list,
>and in another you assume authority, and here, you assume something that
>seems counter to what's actually written in the README.

One certainly assumes different things for different people. An inquiry as
to one's authority should not be assumed to mean I do not know the answer;
perhaps it was rhetoric. Do recall it was private mail not intended for the
list.

>What no-one seems to have brought up so far, is there have been times in
>the past when active members were *not* signed on directly, but were actively
>following the maintained archives on an open web site.  (And if that's 
>still "live" rather than occasionally updated, could someone cough up the
>URL for jhawk here??  TIA) 

What makes you think I do not know it? I think, howver, it is mostly
irrelevent. If someone says "I am not subscribed" it typically means "I am
not subscribed nor am I following along in the archive" or at least "I do
not wish to commit to following along in the archive."

The URL, however, is "http://www.flora.org/lynx-dev/";, and is covered
in the lynx documentation.

>With the active archive, and an "outsider" willing to use it, no such silly 
>requirement to defeat our mailers' standard behavior was necessary, to get 
>messages to that person.  When they posted, we knew they were using the 
>archive, because of web-isms in their quoted message, but (almost) no-one 
>felt compelled to comment upon it.

Doubtless this may be true of some people, but I would not suggest relying
on web-isms (or anything else) to tell you when a non-listmember posts to
the list.

>When I saw an early part of your thread, you said something that carried
>across to me like "who made you a god over how this list works?"  I could
>not say at first whether you were being rude, ignorant, or curious (such
>that I'd mistakenly added emotion to your message).

Oh, almost certainly a combination of all three. Again, private email
forwarded to the list by someone.

>However:
>it seems to mean as much here as any other helpful soul.  So I'll say what
>I'm thinking, and you can think what you like:  you, jhawk, need to find
>a better attitude.

Thank you for your comments. If anything, I've found the non-developer
membership of lynx-dev to be one of the most-irksome-to-deal-with groups of
people in an open-source project. I am quite satisfied with my attitude,
and will submit patches in the future should I feel the need. I will
probably refrain from mentioning my subscription status with respect to the
list to avoid reciving extraneous commentary on it.

>But I presently wonder whether you look at how things are around 
>you before flaming it.

I find myself wondering what you think I flamed. Whatever you do, please
don't tell lynx-dev about it. Tell me in private email if you wish.

>It did not improve my opinion of how deeply you may have looked at code
>before submitting a patch.

It is fortunate that your opinion counts.

>If you insist on "being a loner" don't be surprised if some of us don't
>make the effort I did to cc you.  Yeah, so it's obvious.  Don't go crying
>about it either, and we'll consider you more the kindly for being rational.

I do not believe anything I said could be considered "crying". If you feel
otherwise, please let me know with a specific citation. Again, in private
email.

>> I think that further discussion of this topic without the intent to
>> take concrete action (amend PROBLEMS, change the list software, create
>> a "lynx-bugs" list, etc., etc.) is probably fruitless and I would suggest
>> that it does not benefit the community to pursue it.
>
>I *entirely* disagree over sprouting a different list for bugs.

That's nice. It was not proposed. It was merely an example. Please don't
cry over spilled milk.

>Now, if you see that and say "oh, well why didn't you SAY so?"

No, actually, your text (not quoted) seems mostly orthogonal to all issues
raised.

>-- why, I'd be entirely glad to see that last paragraph, or something
>like it, patched into the right place of the README.

Do submit a patch to the documentation if you believe it reflects the
sense of the community.


Can we all get back to the business of maintaining lynx now?

--jhawk