Re: tutorial or guidebook text for some complex topics

[David Kastrup]

Nick Roberts <address@hidden> writes:

> Drew Adams writes:
>  >      > IIUC, GNU does not want to take the chance that an employer
>  >      > might claim that a contribution was made in the context of
>  >      > employment.
>  > 
>  >     If Oracle are paying you to work on Emacs or even write a
>  >     tutorial or guidebook on it, I can see there might be a problem.
>  >     If your work for them is not related to Emacs then I can't.
>  >     It would be highly unusual for them to specify
>  >     what you do outside work.
>  > 
>  > This is a sidebar, distracting from the real thread. I will
>  > respond, but I don't want to extend the discussion.
>
> My aim is to stop `the real thread' as I don't find it appropriate
> to continually suggest tasks, especially complex ones for after the
> release, when you have no intention of doing them yourself.  In my
> opinion, its a distraction for those who are contributing.  However,
> I'm sure Richard won't agree with me, as the convenience of
> developers seems to come last on his list.

If it is convenient not to hear about useful improvements, I would
share that sentiment.  I don't see a problem with Drew making
suggestions.  It is not like others (including myself) don't speak
ideas as they pop up.  The distracting thing is that he wants to have
them argued through to some finishing line and gets all defensive.
That's what spends time, effort and energy.

One advantage of this mailing list over Usenet is that the
participants are attentive, intelligent and decided enough that it is
mostly a waste of time to argue rather than present a point,
particularly when done repetitively.  When all has been said, it is
the time to move on.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum