RE:Authorship

[Gregory Leblanc <GLeblanc@cu-portland.edu>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Scott [mailto:kinetix@sympatico.ca]
> Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 4:13 PM
> To: Gregory Leblanc; ldp-discuss@lists.linuxdoc.org
> Subject: RE: Authorship
> 
[snip]
> > As for formats, uhm, scary to open that can again.  Anyway, 
> I think we need
> > to start a review process for NEW documents that could 
> become part of the
> > LDP collection.  They propose writing their doc and all 
> that Jazz on the
> > list, then go write it unless somebody else is/has done so. 
>  When it's done,
> > they send a draft of it to the LDP-Submit list, in 
> Any-Old-Format (tm).
> > Anybody who has the time and inclination replies to the 
> list, saying that
> > they're going to take a look at the doc.  We give them a 
> few days to take a
> > look and make sure that the document is acurate, and isn't 
> written without
> > punctuation or capitalization.  Any changes proposed by our 
> reviewers should
> > get sent to the author, and after a few days they can say 
> "ok, I got this
> > feedback from the nice LDP volunteers, and make some 
> changes".  This is the
> > version that will become part of the LDP's collection.  
> 
> I've read / edited a couple of documents on the ldp-submit 
> list. It's a good
> way to see what other authors are doing with their tags (good 
> or bad) and a
> good opportunity to have an impact on the quality of 
> information that goes out.
> I've only had one experience where I didn't get a reply of 
> any sort from the
> author after trying to contact him in a couple of ways. Then 
> again, he probably
> gets more mail than your average Linux enthusiast.
> 
> So, I like the suggestion. We just need people that are 
> willing to do it.
> The information flow on ldp-submit is currently mostly 
> one-directional.

I think this is partly because we don't have much online that tells what to
do on the LDP-submit list.  From the name, I'd assume that it's NOT a list
that should get replies posted to it, although I know this isn't the case.
If we publicize it better, and get a good "welcome" message on there, then I
think it could become a lot more two-way.  This is just a matter of not the
right publication of the purpose of the list.  

> > > 3)  *big assumption*  The author wants to use Linux - meaning a
> > > large preference towards open-source or Linux-based tools.
> > 
> > Hmm...  From talking to one of our authors, this isn't 
> necessarily true
> > either.  Not everybody is "into" Linux.  (You know who are, 
> can I name
> > names?)  They may use Linux for task X, because it's the 
> best possible way
> > to do task X.  They may use some other OS do to task Y, 
> because Linux is
> > ill-suited to that, or because the other OS/tool is so much 
> better suited to
> > it than Linux is.  I'll be happy to bow to majority opinion 
> here, but I've
> > only hear 4 arguments (including mine), two on each side.
> 
> Okay, I would like to question Gary P's argument that using 
> "superior" non-Linux
> tools helps improve the available Linux tools. The problem is 
> that without
> users who can point out the problems that they're 
> encountering with the
> available Linux tools, the people that are capable of 
> developing and improving
> the tools don't have a basis for deciding on what features 
> need to be fixed or
> added. In fact, if no-one ends up using the available Linux 
> tools, there's not
> much reason for a developer to generate new versions at all, is there?

Hmm, you're both right.  There have to be some die-hard who use the Linux
tools, or at least refuse to use the ones on Windows, or nothing gets done.
That's not to say that everyone should be a die-hard, but they are a
REQUIRED element of Free software.  There also need to be people who use the
Windows alternative on a daily basis, who are willing to put in the time
that's required to make the Linux version as good, or better.  I'm doing
this right now with a mail client.  I live in Outlook, and help out the
people writing a Linux (actually in this case it's GNOME, so *nix) version
by telling them some of the good things, and some of the bad things, about
Outlook.  As soon as that client gets to a version where it's safe to use on
my mailbox, I'll start using both, and telling them what needs
fixing/writing.  Since nobody seems to think that patches in Pascal are
good, I've got a while before I can actually fix anything myself.  The same
thing needs to happen with the SGML/XML editors and Integrated Development
Environments for Linux, so that they become superior to those on any other
platform.  

Feel free to flame me (but use the template!) if you think I'm dead wrong.
Otherwise, talk and tell me (and everybody else) what you think!  Later,
	Greg
[snip]


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org