Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
No such thing as a small change
 
PerlMonks  

Re: RFC: a nodetype for considerations

by Tanktalus (Canon)
on Nov 27, 2006 at 22:38 UTC ( #586347=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to RFC: a nodetype for considerations

Why do I think this has come up before?

What will develop is that we'll end up with meta-conversations that may or may not be easy to notice, depending on the implementation details. Which brings me to the second issue - finding someone to implement it ;-)

That said, I'm not really sold on the current view, either. Two possibilities spring to mind. First, some sort of automatic wiki that allows those who can consider to instead update that wiki. Requires a fair bit of restraint to ensure that no one blows away anyone else's remarks, though. Not really sold on this - just the first thing to pop in my head.

Second would be more of a /msg system. Allow nodes to "receive" messages. Allow considerers to send to the node. Allow the considerations nodelet to display all messages to the node. And then Janitors would clear the messages in one fell swoop through the act of editing the node (or not if we want the permanent record). I think I like this better - it keeps everything simpler, at least from an interface perspective. Not so sure about the code side.

Of course, that has pretty much the same downsides as a nodetype - I've taken care of "not easy to notice" - but it's still a meta-conversation, and needs to find someone to implement it.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://586347]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others rifling through the Monastery: (4)
As of 2021-04-14 04:34 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found

    Notices?