Re: contributing instructions are misleading!

[Janek Warchoł]

Hi,

2013/12/12 Graham Percival <address@hidden>:
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 01:48:54PM +0100, Janek Warchoł wrote:
>> PS ccing to Graham because he might be interested to know that
>> Someone(TM) is doing Something(TM) to help new contributors!
>
> Sorry, this awoke Grumpy Graham.

I should have expected that.
Quite frankly, when i read your reply 3 weeks ago, i got irritated,
but fortunately i didn't have time to answer ;-) and now - after
calming down - i have to admit that you make some good points.  My
proposal was not good enough (and i certainly failed to express myself
clearly, because it seems you had slightly misunderstood me).

Anyway, there are two parts to this cg cleanup:
1) removing obsolete info
2) reorganizing things.

1) is a no-brainer, and i'll do it now (and push after patchy confirms
it isn't broken). 2) will have to wait till i have more time
(summer?).

>> After a good deal of thinking, here's how i think CG should be
>> structured.
>
> More thinking and discussion than we had the previous 4 times we
> reorganized the CG?

Quite frankly, i'm pretty sure that i gave CG more thought than all of
us combined since Waltrop 2012 ;-)
Also, times change and stuff like CG gets out of date - even if it was
ok after previous reorganization, it doesn't mean that a new
reorganization isn't warranted, don't you think?

Anyway, guess what?  +1 for Graham!  :-)

cheers,
Janek