= Сообщение: 86 из 7124 ======================================== FTSC_PUBLIC = От : mark lewis 1:3634/12.71 23 Oct 13 19:20:21 Кому : Nick Andre 23 Oct 13 19:20:21 Тема : FTSC Nominations FGHI : area://FTSC_PUBLIC?msgid=1:3634/12.71+26859331 = Кодировка сообщения определена как: CP866 ================================== ==============================================================================
On Wed, 23 Oct 2013, Nick Andre wrote to Mark Lewis:
ML> NA> Either the FTSC is not doing its job by publishing CLEAR ML> NA> standards, ML> possibly but that's up to the chairperson and the members, isn't it?
NA> If the standards are clear, then time is being spent elsewhere.
i guess... but that depends on what is meant by "clear" in the documentation... what you and i might read as clear and concise is not read the say way by others... eg: how many packages do you know of that put both PID control lines *AND* tearlines with product information for the same product listed in the PID??
ML> i don't know what the product is... uli reported it recently... ML> and we're not talking about the PID control line... we're talking ML> about the product id inside a PKT file... i know of at least one ML> product that alters its process
NA> LOL!!!! Hands down, bad programming. PID is freaking easy to NA> implement. Its clearly documented!
you miss the point... that point being that some software is processing based on what they find as the PID... not that the OID is not implemented incorrectly... i agree that software should not process PKTs based on what package created the PKT...
NA> Its not the FTSC's job to demonstrate programming examples of how NA> to write PID's or what breaks other programs.
no one said that that was being done...
ML> NA> Then the FTSC is totally completely useless as it is, not ML> NA> doing its job and should be disbanded or greatly reduced ML> NA> as I suggested. ML> ML> this is part of the task of the chairman, isn't it? the size of ML> the FTSC has nothing to do with what the FTSC does... leadership is ML> a big part, too...
NA> The size has everything to do with the FTSC. Too many cooks in the NA> kitchen and people being elected for the wrong reasons.
that still has nothing to do with the size... have you seen "too many cooks" with the binkp standard? any others?? is it not the job of each FTSC member to offer input, if they have any, on proposals and standards being reviewed?
ML> the FTSC does not babysit other programmers' software... the FTSC ML> does not offer unlimited free technical support, either... who said ML> they did?
NA> Whoever feels the need to turn the private FTSC echo from NA> paper-shuffling into discussions about trivial things like PID.
who is doing that, nick? i haven't seen such traffic... have you??
ML> isn't this period about the elections?
NA> Which is why I'm commenting on it, as this is an FTSC-related NA> discussion and I mentioned earlier that I'm curious what the NA> candidates would do to make Fidonet more developer-friendly. NA> Andrew stated he did some work on a Wiki...
that was back when... do you really think a wiki is user friendly? i haven't found one yet that is and i'm an editor on numerous wikis... i don't know of one for your product, either... is there one??
