GROUP - Create a new group "trac-hacks" ?

[Ilias Lazaridis]

"trac-dev" subjects trac development
"trac-users" subject trac usage (and customization)

I think a "trac-hacks" group is missing, where plugin/macro developers
can discuss, without creating traffic on trac-users and trac-dev.

"trac-hacks" in order to honor the trac-hacks project (don't know who
manages this).

(btw: Without a group trac-hacks, should I post on USERS or on DEV for
plugin development related stuff? )

.

--
http://lazaridis.com

[Ilias Lazaridis]

???

.

--
http://lazaridis.com

[Christian Boos]

Plugin development in as much as it relates to interaction with the Trac
core should be discussed on Trac-Dev.
E.g. requests for new interfaces or discussing API changes to existing
ones would be appropriate there; discussing the implementations details
of a particular plugin would not.

-- Christian

[Ilias Lazaridis]

Christian Boos wrote:
> Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
> > Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
> >
> >> "trac-dev" subjects trac development
> >> "trac-users" subject trac usage (and customization)
> >>
> >> I think a "trac-hacks" group is missing, where plugin/macro developers
> >> can discuss, without creating traffic on trac-users and trac-dev.
> >>
> >> "trac-hacks" in order to honor the trac-hacks project (don't know who
> >> manages this).
> >>
> >> (btw: Without a group trac-hacks, should I post on USERS or on DEV for
> >> plugin development related stuff? )
>

> Plugin development in as much as it relates to interaction with the Trac
> core should be discussed on Trac-Dev.
> E.g. requests for new interfaces or discussing API changes to existing
> ones would be appropriate there;

Ok, everything which would alter the trac-code can be discussed there.

But until one reaches this point to know that it does _not_ affect the
trac-code (and thus trac-dev), he will make 'noise' on trac-dev.

> discussing the implementations details of a particular plugin would not.

and this would _not_ fit into the trac-users, too (which is about using
trac and about _using_ plugins)

so, it seems ther's really a group missing.

.

--
http://lazaridis.com

[Clay Loveless]

On Sep 24, 2006, at 12:00 PM, Ilias Lazaridis wrote:

> so, it seems ther's really a group missing.

So perhaps you should create that group, or propose that to Alec
Thomas, maintainer of TracHacks.

http://trac-hacks.org/wiki/athomas

-Clay

--
Killersoft.com

[Ilias Lazaridis]

Clay Loveless wrote:
> On Sep 24, 2006, at 12:00 PM, Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
>
>> so, it seems ther's really a group missing.
>
> So perhaps you should create that group, or propose that to Alec
> Thomas, maintainer of TracHacks.

ok, cc to Alec Thomas:

what do you think about a trac-hacks group on google?

http://groups.google.com/group/trac-users/browse_frm/thread/826c426070558adf

> http://trac-hacks.org/wiki/athomas
>
> -Clay
>
> --
> Killersoft.com

.

--
http://lazaridis.com

[Noah Kantrowitz]

I'm not sure why this type of discussion can't happen on trac-dev.
Does anyone actually object to that?

--Noah

[Ilias Lazaridis]

Noah Kantrowitz wrote:
> On Sep 24, 2006, at 3:19 PM, Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
> > Clay Loveless wrote:
> >> On Sep 24, 2006, at 12:00 PM, Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
> >>
> >>> so, it seems ther's really a group missing.
> >>
> >> So perhaps you should create that group, or propose that to Alec
> >> Thomas, maintainer of TracHacks.
> >
> > ok, cc to Alec Thomas:
> >
> > what do you think about a trac-hacks group on google?
>

> I'm not sure why this type of discussion can't happen on trac-dev.

This is simply about seperating content, nothing special.

> Does anyone actually object to that?

Personally, I would like to have clearly separated content, thus I can
focus to read only relevant stuff.

.

[Noah Kantrowitz]

Neither trac-users nor trac-dev are high-traffic enough that I think it
is a problem.

--Noah

[Sid Wiesner]

Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
> Noah Kantrowitz wrote:
>> On Sep 24, 2006, at 3:19 PM, Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
>>> Clay Loveless wrote:
>>>> On Sep 24, 2006, at 12:00 PM, Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> so, it seems ther's really a group missing.
>>>> So perhaps you should create that group, or propose that to Alec
>>>> Thomas, maintainer of TracHacks.
>>> ok, cc to Alec Thomas:
>>>
>>> what do you think about a trac-hacks group on google?
>> I'm not sure why this type of discussion can't happen on trac-dev.
>

> Personally, I would like to have clearly separated content, thus I can
> focus to read only relevant stuff.

The separation seems pretty clear to me. User, installation, and
configuration support happens on trac-users group. Development
discussions (whether core or modules) happen on trac-dev.

Sid

[Jim Nanney]

On 9/26/06, Noah Kantrowitz <kan...@rpi.edu> wrote:
>
> Neither trac-users nor trac-dev are high-traffic enough that I think it
> is a problem.
>
> --Noah
>

+1 here.

Since joining the mailing lists in July (July 21) there are 48 threads
on trac-dev, 4 that deal with plugins and macros. Hardly enough for a
split in my opinion.

[Ilias Lazaridis]

you (all of you) can ignore the argumentation-line, the rationales and
even the statements of existent developers (which relay me essentially
to an non-existen group).

Trac will become more popular, and it's time to prepare the project by
providing consistent resources.

At the minimum, the documentation should be upgraded to make concise
statements about where to post:

http://trac.edgewall.org/wiki/MailingList

(even if it's finally inconsistent).

.

[Noah Kantrowitz]

I think most of us who answer a lot of questions are on both lists, and
it makes no difference to me personally which list they ask on. I would
with Sid that a plugin usage question should probably go to trac-users,
and a plugin development should go to trac-dev, but if not, oh well. Its
really not a big deal IMO.

--Noah

[Ilias Lazaridis]

Noah Kantrowitz wrote:
> Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
> > Jim Nanney wrote:
> >> On 9/26/06, Noah Kantrowitz <kan...@rpi.edu> wrote:
> >>> Neither trac-users nor trac-dev are high-traffic enough that I think it
> >>> is a problem.
> >>>
> >>> --Noah
> >> +1 here.
> >>
> >> Since joining the mailing lists in July (July 21) there are 48 threads
> >> on trac-dev, 4 that deal with plugins and macros. Hardly enough for a
> >> split in my opinion.
> >
> > you (all of you) can ignore the argumentation-line, the rationales and
> > even the statements of existent developers (which relay me essentially
> > to an non-existen group).
> >
> > Trac will become more popular, and it's time to prepare the project by
> > providing consistent resources.
> >
> > At the minimum, the documentation should be upgraded to make concise
> > statements about where to post:
> >
> > http://trac.edgewall.org/wiki/MailingList
> >
> > (even if it's finally inconsistent).
> >
>

> I think most of us who answer a lot of questions are on both lists, and
> it makes no difference to me personally which list they ask on. I would
> with Sid that a plugin usage question should probably go to trac-users,
> and a plugin development should go to trac-dev, but if not, oh well. Its
> really not a big deal IMO.

just reread the thread after a few days.

for me it's time to sleep!

good night to all.

.