[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Towards De-icing ice-9 modules.

From: Chad Albers
Subject: Re: Towards De-icing ice-9 modules.
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 17:09:45 -0500


That totally make sense.  I understand.

As it stands now, the document will need to be reformatted.  Can be attached to a email to the mailing list, and still be archived? Or should I paste it inline?


Chad Albers

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 4:57 PM, Mark H Weaver <address@hidden> wrote:
Chad Albers <address@hidden> writes:

> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 4:18 PM, Mark H Weaver <address@hidden> wrote:
>  I would thank you for this, but I cannot even view it without running
>  nonfree software on my machine. Posting this link essentially puts
>  pressure on those who wish to have a voice in this discussion to use
>  nonfree software, and excludes those who take a principled stand against
>  using nonfree software. That's not good.
>  > (I apologize that it's a google document. I couldn't find a
>  > comparable,free software online collaborative alternative. suggestions
>  > are welcome).
>  We must not collaborate on a platform where using nonfree software is a
>  prerequisite for entry.
>  Can you please send it in email as plain text?
> I adamantly agree with your sentiments. The ideal solution in my
> opinion would be a wikipage, so people could comment. Does anyone have
> access to one that we all could also read, without having to create a
> user-account (bonus points)?

Another issue is that it would be good for this discussion, as well as
the drafts of your proposal, counterproposals, etc, to be archived
somewhere that we can be reasonably confident will still exist and be
easy to find in 20 years or more.

If we use a collaborative document editor implemented in _javascript_,
then participants in the discussion will have no good choice but to use
that one centralized tool to edit the proposal, write comments, etc, and
I'm doubtful that the history of edits, draft proposals and discussion
will be easily reviewable in 20 years.

We have a long history of making proposals, revising them, and
discussing them here on the mailing list in plain text.  This not only
ensures that all of the relevant information is archived, but also
allows people to use their preferred email client and text editor to
modify the proposals and respond to them.

Does that make sense?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]