From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Sun Apr 27 20:45:05 2003 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list bpfk-announce); Sun, 27 Apr 2003 20:45:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rlpowell by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.12) id 199zZR-0006Gy-00; Sun, 27 Apr 2003 20:44:49 -0700 Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 20:44:49 -0700 To: bpfk-announce@lojban.org, lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [bpfk-announce] HOW-TO: BPFK setup change requests. Message-ID: <20030428034449.GC22216@digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: bpfk-announce@lojban.org, lojban-list@lojban.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i From: Robin Lee Powell X-archive-position: 4 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: bpfk-announce-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org Errors-to: bpfk-announce-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: bpfk-announce@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-list: bpfk-announce Before I even get started, FFS people, BPFK requests do *NOT* belong on the main list. Try private mail to me or Nick, or request@lojban.org if you have passed *all* of the below but part #6. Here's a handy-dandy little flowchart explaining how to suggest changes to the BPFK Infrastructure. When reading this, bear in mind the the specification for the BPFK has been available for *MONTHS*, and no-one commented on it (see the links in #1). So if I sound a teensy bit bitter at being second-guessed at this late stage, it's because I am. Bear in mind also that I am doing a *stupendous* amount of lojban-related work right now, and requests to spend tens of hours of my time without volunteering to help are not appreciated. 1. Does it conform with http://www.lojban.org/wiki/index.php/Mini-dictionary, as well as any relevant sections in http://www.lojban.com/cgi-bin/twiki/view/BPFK/GuidelinesForUsing ? YES: Continue. NO: Go Stick Your Head In A Pig[1]. 2. Are you the only person affected by the change AND it will take more than 5 minutes to implement as far as you can tell? NO: Continue. YES: Go Stick Your Head In A Pig. 3. Have you talked to the BPFK captain and gotten his agreement that this is a Good Idea? YES: Continue. NO: Perhaps you should do that. 4. Does your proposed modification do something that is actually useful and can't easily be handled some other way (IOW, are you fixing something that's actually broken)? Examples of things that do not fit this criteria are offline viewing and spell checking (both of which can be handled by your favorite word processor and "Save As Text". YES: Continue. NO: Go Stick Your Head In A Pig. 5. Are at least one of the following sets true: A modification for the existing infrastructure already exists and will do what you want AND you know where it is and can point the webmaster to it. Someone in the Lojban community has volunteered to write, AND has *finished* writing the modification you want AND it has been tested. YES: Continue. NO: Well, get to work. 6. Have you talked to the webmaster and convinced em that the difficulty involved is worth the effort? YES: Great. Now sit back and wait for the webmaster to have time for this. NO: Perhaps you should do that. If you don't want to, you are more than welcome to host it yourself. Failing that, feel free to Go Stick Your Head In A Pig. -Robin [1]: http://hhgproject.org/entries/shareandenjoy.html -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** I'm a *male* Robin. .i le pamoi velru'e zo'u crepu le plibu taxfu .i le remoi velru'e zo'u mo .i le cimoi velru'e zo'u ba'e prali .uisai http://www.lojban.org/ *** to sa'a cu'u lei pibyta'u cridrnoma toi