- [All, None, Some] is a great idea
- Not pushing: volkmar made a pull request for this, which needs a tiny change (being called “pretend’ instead of “dry-run”). See https://github.com/pbiggar/trychooser/pull/3
- this is really easy to fix. I might do that if nobody beats me to it. (If you were interested in doing this, it would be a nice easy first step).

- I’d love an option where it just created the cset but doesn’t actually push.. I want to be able to run hg outgoing and keep the cset around for future uses

- try: -a is deprecated and doesn’t run the full suite anymore.. see this on trybuilder, the correct syntax now for everything is try: -b do -p all -u all -t all

We could make it so that it pushes even if mq is not enabled, with a similar UI. I’d be delighted to incorporate a patch for that :)

you could have indeed thematic archives, or a a general archive mailing-list, I would recommend two at least, one which is “private” and related to the social contract of the group and one which is open to the public when it is about public communications. 

I like it. Well, ok, I like the pbiggar-public incarnation of the idea.

The problem with pbiggar at mozilla.com being public is that you are deciding on the sender’s behalf that the message should be public. Which isn’t nice. At all. Especially for people who haven’t emailed you before and aren’t aware yet.

One concern would be requiring correspondents to keep track of one more email address for you. That’s unnecessary for pbiggar-public at mozilla.com or pbiggar+public at mozilla.com or (I think I prefer this) pbiggar at public.mozilla.com. But a lot of people use other email addresses. I have both sfink at mozilla.com and sphink at gmail.com, for example, and I use both for different segments of my Mozilla-related mail. I also use Thunderbird as a mail filter on my gmail account (it sorta works), so I *could* set it up to work (well, public.gmail.com won’t), but I think this would need a common mechanism to work.

Just handling mozilla.com addresses would be enough for this to be useful, I think. There could be a fallback CC for other addresses.

One missing piece — if I send to pbiggar-public, which CC list does it go to? Or more to the point, if I send to bz-public or damons-public, where does it go? Is there a mapping of user -> set of CC lists?

It might be useful to also post initial thread subject lines to the relevant IRC channel as well. Or a CC version of the IRC channel.

And we’d have to establish conventions about when it’s ok for a third-party observer to start participating in the conversation — read-only access to these sorts of conversations is one thing, but if I wouldn’t use it if people felt free to start chipping in and starting flamewars on them.

I’d be ok with a policy where you never interject into someone else’s conversation, but you’re always free to start a new thread quoting anything in that conversation.

(Side note: I used ” at ” everywhere in this post in place of the at-sign not for spam protection, but because the commenting software is doing something truly horrible and evil where it tries to make special links or something when it sees an at sign. And they’re hard to get rid of. Even if you’re nowhere near, the magic-at handler seems to take control of the enter key. Kill kill die die die.)

http://www.codesimplicity.com/post/open-source-community-simplified/

-Max

You really have been living under a rock.

Paying writers would have changed the dynamic of our relationship. We weren’t buying content, and we weren’t hiring journalists. We were providing a service to them, and aiming to take a cut of their profits online as our income.

We didn’t just invent this idea. We spoke to dozens of journalists, and the product was based entirely on what they told us. We spoke to some people at Knight (not in an official capacity); I don’t want to put words in their mouths, but they obviously didn’t tell us we were doing the wrong thing or we would have changed what we were doing.

Our intent was plain. We wanted to make a successful company making a successful product. We could only have done that through making successful journalists. Our funders we mentioned in this piece several times: YCombinator. I’m sure they’d be delighted to invest in real journalists, and the application process is open for a few more days I believe. YCombinator’s motto is ‘make something people want’, and that’s what we were doing.

I’m afraid your final paragraph simply makes no sense. Art/science is a false dichotomy, as is left-/right-brained. To think that journalism can only come from inside to box is ludicrous. People have many skills besides the one in which they are trained, and you certainly believe this or you wouldn’t suggest that journalists, whose primary skill is not innovation, can innovate. Please don’t believe that anyone can think themselves out of this wasteland. It requires not only innovation and the right creative force (for want of a better term), but also rapid iteration, and lots of different companies trying.