Discussion topic (Re: SPI bylaws overhaul: new discussion draft)

From: Filipus Klutiero <chealer(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org
Subject: Discussion topic (Re: SPI bylaws overhaul: new discussion draft)
Date: 2016-11-20 17:20:07
Message-ID: 85039669-3861-5e35-5a2a-aac88a30b18e@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: spi-general

Hi Jimmy,

On 2016-11-16 13:03, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 03:27:22AM +0000, Luca Filipozzi wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 06:58:26PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>> On 11/15/2016 06:27 PM, Luca Filipozzi wrote:
>>>> On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 11:36:52AM -0500, Hilmar Lapp wrote:
>>>>> One thing I’d submit for consideration that could be learned from this and
>>>>> change is to take the opportunity to put the text into Markdown (or LaTeX)
>>>>> format and host it in version control. Then the version control system does
>>>>> the diff, and presenting them, for you without any additional effort.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here’s an example from the most recent bylaws changes for OBF:
>>>>> https://github.com/OBF/obf-docs/pull/28
>>>>> https://github.com/OBF/obf-docs/pull/29
>>>>>
>>>>> I understand that many in SPI have strong reservations about Github, but
>>>>> obviously Github is far from the only platform that allows doing this.
>>>> I think that the salient points, here, are:
>>>> - use a plain text 'source' format for the input
>>>> - use a source code management system to capture revisions and produce deltas
>>>> - publish the deltas so that the members can easily review the proposed changes
>>>> - use a formatter to 'compile' the input into published representation
>>>>
>>>> We can achieve the above wthout having to use github.
>>>>
>>>> I'm perfectly happy to use Markdown and I'd prefer it to LaTeX.
>>> Or just use ODF with commenting?
>> I'll admit a significantly stronger preference to Markdown (or other plain text
>> input format) to ODF (ie XML) and the use of diff over 'track changes'.
>>
>> That said, I'm not editing the bylaws so I leave it to the those who are to
>> decide.
> These discussions are only worth having in the context of hoping to make
> changes to the content of the bylaws. Accordingly, now that I've provided an
> automatic diff alongside my textual summary and am aware of the issue for the
> future, can we refocus this conversation on substantive feedback? I fear some
> people with substantive opinions may already have tuned out this thread based
> on how extended this comparison and formatting discussion has become.
>

If there is concern that discussion about identifying the proposed changes is hurting discussion about the proposed changes, I recommend retitling subthreads about the former so the precise topic can be quickly determined.

--
Filipus Klutiero
http://www.philippecloutier.com

Browse spi-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Filipus Klutiero 2016-11-20 17:46:32 Re: SPI bylaws overhaul: Board Attendence
Previous Message Bill Allombert 2016-11-18 16:08:21 Re: Staff Work WAS: SPI bylaws overhaul: Board Attendence