Text 6187, 73 rader
Skriven 2013-10-22 20:46:23 av mark lewis (1:3634/12.71)
   Kommentar till text 6181 av Ward Dossche (2:292/854)
Ärende: FTSC Nominations
========================
On Tue, 22 Oct 2013, Ward Dossche wrote to mark lewis:

ml> yes... for several reasons...
 WD>  
ml> 1. to ensure that software conforms to the standards and proposals
ml> they support.
 WD>  
 WD> That's the best way to kill development of new stuff. Software
 WD> developpers are like artists ... you should not say where the
 WD> limits are nor indicate boundaries as that does a great disservice
 WD> to their talents.

you have misread what i wrote... there have been recent packages developed and
in use in fidonet... there have been problems with some of their
implementations of the standards they are trying to support... without someone
pointing out the problems and exactly how/where the data is incorrect, they may
or may not know about or find the problem until later...
  
ml> 2. to assist developers in understanding the standards and
ml> proposals they choose to support in their software.
 WD>  
 WD> These guys are not exactly morons you know. I don't think any
 WD> developper is in need of having his/her hand held...

i have spent a lot of time talking with several developers and assisting them
to understand how certain things work... BSO was a big thing during the time it
was being implemented in one package and more recently there is a problem being
worked on between two packages trying to handle multiple PKT formats... one
only supported 2+ and choked when 2 was presented... the other was trying to
present 2 but was also putting in data that belongs in 2+ but one specific part
of the 2+ format was being missed... this was causing the above package to
misinterpret the format and use incorrect values during the mailprocessing...

at least one of these developers has never coded anything for FTN mail ops...
they are learning, today, as they go but their software is being used by quite
a few systems in live installations... not only in fidonet but several
othernets, too... i'm very sure that they appreciate someone in the know who is
willing to explain things and to help diagnosing the specific of the
problems... especially since i've been asked to join them in at least one
othernet to assist over there as well as in fidonet...

yes, i've been in contact with both of the above mentioned developers, if
that's not pretty obvious... one of those developers and i have been conversing
for over a year...
  
ml> at least those three in addition to the updating and review of existing
ml> standards and proposals as well raising proposals to standards...
 WD>  
 WD> How productive ... like promoting binkd to become a standard after
 WD> the whole net has been using it already.

not only binkd but type 2.2 and type 2+ PKTs as well... there are numerous
other proposals that should have been raised to standards by the first FTSC
before they disappeared and the second FTSC should have raised them when they
formed up... they didn't for whatever reasons... now we have the third FTSC and
they are still not raised... something is wrong with this picture :/
  
 WD> You have not presented a valid reason for the existance of the FTSC
 WD> other than self-promotion of specific individuals.

i don't know what you read but i didn't say anything about self-promotion or
individuals... please read what i wrote with an open mind and understand the
broad aspects that it is aimed at...

and lastly, this is not about me as my membership is still in effect for
another while... i simply answered a generic question that was posted to all
and sundry... now i will step back let the candidates speak their minds on the
topic if they desire to...

)\/(ark

--- FMail/Win32 1.60
 * Origin:  (1:3634/12.71)