--- David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 23/09/06, Birgitte SB birgitte_sb@yahoo.com wrote:
people are becoming frustrated with this. It
seems a
great deal of very minor issues are handled for
en.WP
very quickly. They have recently gotten help to rearrange the side bar display of all things. Yet everyone says the developers are overworked. So I would think somehow this system of prioritizing
what
gets done (bugzilla) must be broken. Now this is my personal opinion. I care ten
times
more that the development needs of my community
are
more fairly addressed, than that the community's voices in the Board Elections are not drowned out
by
en.WP.
It's an Americocentric conspiracy to take over Wikimedia, and absolutely the most effective thing for you to do is Assume Bad Faith! DOWN WITH EN:WP!!
No, actually it's probably because a lot of the devs start as editors on en:wp and so that tends to be the project they hang around on and hear the bugs of most. e.g. Rob Church, who has done a *remarkable* amount of recent work on MediaWiki and can be found on en:wp and on #wikipedia ... or Tim Starling, who started as a contributor, realised there was an urgent need for development and sysadmin and pretty much moved to that.
That is: if your project doesn't get its favourite bugs fixed, it's not favouritism to en:wp - it's your project not contributing to the development. These are volunteers, if you recall.
- d.
Yes I do realize a big part of issue is that the people interested in development are inherently not interested in Wikisource. I was just trying to compare this issue with everyone talking about en.WP dominating election issues and voting (which everyone seemed to classify as a "bad thing") But seriously to everyone who thinks I am just being unrealistic here, is nine months to short a time to start complaining? Seriously what should my expectations be?
Birgitte SB
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com