Status reports - why not regularly?

[Eric Anderson]

Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:

>Eric Anderson <anderson at centtech.com> writes:
>  
>
>>It would be much more efficient if even *some* of the developers that
>>are working on "new-and-cool" features would at least mention it on
>>the -CURRENT list, or even send an email to the person (people?)
>>working on the report.  [...]
>>Josef already agreed to do the markup (the most tedious part of the
>>work) - so now it's just information gathering..
>>    
>>
>
>You must have missed the part of this thread where I said "we tried
>that before, and it didn't work".
>  
>
No, I didn't miss it - I must have misunderstood it.  I thought you said 
you tried having all the developers reporting all the info to someone, 
and they compile it (which is what I am saying is the more efficient 
method).  However, where you put the [...], I had written:
"...I know it's too much to ask o have every committer doing this - I 
would never expect that, but possibly there are a few core people that 
could occasionaly shoot an email out with some highlights..." and 
"...Anyhow, it's a great idea, and I think the "just do it" term applies 
here - start with what can be figured out, and then hunt committers and 
start questioning them ("hey, what's this new thing you've been 
committing a lot of lately?").. "  Which I thought clearly stated "start 
writing what you do know, and then ping the developers individually 
about things you don't"..  I understand now that you are saying that 
method did not work either, in which case there isn't much left except 
writing what he can gather from non developers I suppose.  Seems strange 
that the developers wouldn't want their hard work to be known..

Eric


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Anderson	   Systems Administrator      Centaur Technology
All generalizations are false, including this one.
------------------------------------------------------------------