On 9/6/19 9:55 AM, gouessej [via jogamp] wrote:
> Sven Gothel wrote
> Great Julien, thank you!
>
> You're welcome. Actually, in my humble opinion, JogAmp stuff should be in one
> place and JogAmp sub-projects should have similar policies on licensing, bug
> reporting, communication, ... It would be easier to explain for us, easier to
> understand for newcomers and easier to manage for us.
Julien, what you describe below is surely the default recommendation
and I agree of course.
Official channels are from jogamp.org: git, bugzilla, wiki, forum, etc.
The github repo and others are, as you said, just a backup for convenience.
If anybody answers other questions, they might want to drop the answer in
this forum, wiki, bugzilla and give the source a link.
Just an example to not lose valuable information, if so.
~Sven
>
> For example, if we systematically encourage our users to ask their questions
> preferably here, the people most able to answer (often the maintainers and the
> contributors) won't have to waste some time on social media and third party
> websites, they will be able to focus on their tasks and they will have a
> single place to control. Personally, I won't register everywhere on Internet
> to answer questions about JogAmp APIs and I'm probably not alone in this case.
> The situation is becoming problematic on Github because I seriously plan to
> leave it and it would be a more comfortable change for me if all maintainers
> refrained themselves from managing issues and pull requests on it because I
> often have to reply. Charity begins at home, I've repeated for years on
> StackOverflow that JOGL specific questions should be posted on our forum and
> I'll leave StackOverflow one day. Github should have been used only as a
> mirror from the very beginning and it's perfectly fine for me not to use it at
> all. I don't want to get much visibility at the price of giving much power to
> Microsoft.
>
> It reminds me that some precious resources should be moved or at least copied
> into the wiki.
Locked
