volume of discussion
Arthur A. Gleckler
(01 May 2021 16:50 UTC)
|
Re: volume of discussion
John Cowan
(01 May 2021 16:53 UTC)
|
Re: volume of discussion
(no sender)
(01 May 2021 16:59 UTC)
|
Re: volume of discussion
Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe
(01 May 2021 17:10 UTC)
|
Re: volume of discussion Lassi Kortela (01 May 2021 20:56 UTC)
|
Re: volume of discussion
John Cowan
(01 May 2021 21:44 UTC)
|
Re: volume of discussion
Arthur A. Gleckler
(01 May 2021 17:04 UTC)
|
Re: volume of discussion
John Cowan
(01 May 2021 18:37 UTC)
|
Re: volume of discussion
Arthur A. Gleckler
(01 May 2021 20:09 UTC)
|
Re: volume of discussion
Lassi Kortela
(01 May 2021 20:47 UTC)
|
Re: volume of discussion Lassi Kortela 01 May 2021 20:56 UTC
>> I agree! >> >> Alternatively (which is probably harder), encourage people to move to a >> different medium (which one and where?) when it is more about chatter that >> doesn't need to archived. > > The #scheme-live channel on Freenode has been active (albeit with just > a handful of familiar names) for a while now. I'd suggest this as a > less formal and more topic-appropirate venue for this discussion, if > you don't mind IRC. I apologize for abruptly dropping off IRC. #scheme-live had good discussion but we did not really end up doing design work there; #scheme is in the same boat. So far email and GitHub issues have been productive design outlets. I have similar experiences with Slack as with IRC re: design, things quickly get disorganized and people aren't generally in a mood to work on concrete problems there. A way to group discussion threads by subject seems to be a necessary and sufficient condition for design work. The last thread on Scheme processes should have perhaps gone to the WG2 mailing list; it's hard to say with the work being so intertwined.