On Monday 05 March 2007 16:27, Pascal Bleser wrote:
Rajko M. wrote:
posts about IRC, I decided to make a list of my reasons:
- One has to pick up pieces of conversation that belong to him in a mess
on the screen which takes attention from the content. This is good suited
for chat, but not for serious work.
Wrong. That's extremely efficient at getting serious work done because
it's interactive and you don't have to wait a day before getting a reply
as with emails. You can get it immediately.
1) you have all involved people present.
2) problem is not complex ie. doesn't need lengthy preparation,
3) troubleshooting process has complex structure where next step depends on
results of previous, and description of all branches is impractical.
Though, my point was about screen that is not easy to read, and that will
diminish efficiency in any case.
Luckilly that alone doesn't make a total, so I can agree that they are
efficient in some cases.
something is gone from the screen it can be found in the logs,
which in effect lowers average speed substantially. Old messages are not
important in a chat, so this doesn't make a problem, but in bug solving
effort it will make problems.
The point is to act on one item at a time. It's about being interactive,
immediate, to get the right people into the channel and get the work done.
It is still problem as discussion can be longer, and important info can fly
off the screen. My guess is that it doesn't happen often, so one can have
time to search in session logs if necessary.
- Time zones
exist and it is another reason against IRC
Yes but that's exactly the reasons for the deficiency of emails for
certain use cases. You send a mail, you get a reply 8 hours later while
you're sleeping, in the morning you reply, and 2 days later someone
sends a much better solution or opinion.
IRC will never give a chance to one that really has advice to read about your
problem and send message 2 days later. This actually confirms that email or
newsgroups have essential advantage in this respect.
- I have to
learn how to use it efficiently, starting with command set,
and previous reasons don't help me to see why.
You just have to type the text. No special command set to know unless
you're a channel operator.
I tried that on single status meeting that I was able to attend as I was on
vacation, and until I type my comment/question, there is few lines between.
Not good. Go back and try to type the name to whom you talk. In the meantime
there is even more lines between.
There was a
comment that email will be essentially repeating what is done
Yes, it will be, but using medium where threading is supported which will
give us easy way to see who is replying to what, which thread goes in
right direction. Bugzilla messages are not intended for discussions, and
reading beyond first few posts becomes quite annoying experience.
But maybe the point about the triage is precisely to get it done
quickly, not spend weeks to discuss it -- exactly as on bugzilla or
Quickly will not help if it is not prepared.
I can't be tricked with status meetings where people come prepared for
questions in agenda. If similar will be applied to bug smash fest, than it
will be efficient.
It means that bugs has to be sorted by hardware and software categories and
than published as a preparation for the event making possible to prepare
yourself for the event.
On the user side it would be advantage to have hardware and software data
about computer collected in the same fashion as it is presented on the list,
so that people can find what bugs they can help with.
This of course can be completely automated trough one script that will collect
data, compare to downloaded list of existing bugs, and produce list of bugs
that one can help with.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help(a)opensuse.org