search

bible-technology / scripture-burrito

Scripture Burrito Schema & Docs 🌯
http://docs.burrito.bible/
MIT License
21 stars 13 forks source link

Documenting flavors that don't exist yet? #174

Closed mvahowe closed 4 years ago

mvahowe commented 4 years ago

It looks like we opened these issues a long time ago. I don't think we have immediate plans to create these flavors, so can we close these issues and make new ones when we do have a plan?

jonathanrobie commented 4 years ago

I would rather have these issues stay open. It makes it easier to see what kinds of things we still need to do.

On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 4:03 AM Mark Howe notifications@github.com wrote:

It looks like we opened these issues a long time ago. I don't think we have immediate plans to create these flavors, so can we close these issues and make new ones when we do have a plan?

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/bible-technology/scripture-burrito/issues/174, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AANPTPNZRP6WE7EX3UXXDFLRKRBD5ANCNFSM4L2DJ5TA .

FoolRunning commented 4 years ago

I agree with keeping them open. It doesn't look like any are in the 0.2 milestone, so they shouldn't be holding up any work.

mvahowe commented 4 years ago

They aren't holding up any work, it's just that "we" don't "still need to do" any of this, according to https://docs.burrito.bible/en/v0.1.0/extending.html

I'd really like us to drop our collegiate messiah complex. It's not our job to try to guess what everyone in the world needs and try to give it to them. If someone wants a flavor for syntax trees, there's a process for doing some preparatory work before talking to us. If no-one is doing that, why do "we still need to do" anything? If someone who does need this doing finds that issue, they are likely to assume that it's all under control, which is the precise opposite of what we should be communicating.

jonathanrobie commented 4 years ago

Could we please focus on the things needed for the 0.2 milestone and worry about this kind of question after that? We have agreed not to bring in these questions until after that point, closing issues because we have not yet taken them on seems counterproductive.

On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 8:31 AM Mark Howe notifications@github.com wrote:

They aren't holding up any work, it's just that "we" don't "still need to do" any of this, according to https://docs.burrito.bible/en/v0.1.0/extending.html

I'd really like us to drop our collegiate messiah complex. It's not our job to try to guess what everyone in the world needs and try to give it to them. If someone wants a flavor for syntax trees, there's a process for doing some preparatory work before talking to us. If no-one is doing that, why do "we still need to do" anything? If someone who does this doing finds that issue, they are likely to assume that it's all under control, which is the precise opposite of what we should be communicating.

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/bible-technology/scripture-burrito/issues/174#issuecomment-607816768, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AANPTPKDRU3DNGBOJUDQ5LTRKSARFANCNFSM4L2DJ5TA .

mvahowe commented 4 years ago

Focusing on 0.2, and then things we may do before the Eschaton, is exactly why I'd like to close these issues. Between documentation tasks where there's nothing to document and use cases that have been untouched for 4 months and which aren't use cases for SB anyway, a significant proportion of all our issues are currently doing nothing but stopping us from seeing what we could actually be working on.

Also, by this logic, we could list every single thing we haven't done, and have no plan to do, and that no-one here is offering to do, which would give us a million completely useless issues. Generating lists in itself doesn't solve problems.