Group Names .. was .. Re: [Theforum] Charter Working Group

[Daniel J. Cody]

I would akin this(maybe poorly) to the 'backend group;(Servers,
networking, etc..) saying they should be too different groups because
the server administration is much different than network administration,
which is *WAY* different than managing user accounts.

what that group, as a whole, needs to figure out is if they can do it
together, and if not, split a group *off itself* to tackle that thing
which is so different..

its not the best example, but i'm late for a meeting...

.djc.

Michele Foster wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Lachlan Cannon" <luminosity at members.evolt.org>
>
>
> | I'm pretty much agreeing with Isaac here. You need a seperate group for
> | frontend, backend, and hardware. The trouble is the large difference
> between
> | frontend and backend. There'll always be a gulf between them. Issues like
> IA
> | I would argue are backend ones because they're integral to the
> architecture,
> | whereas frontend is about making a good interface.
> |
> | Do I need to clarify this further?
> |
>
> Lach,
>
> No, you don't need to clarify your position further.  I understand what you
> are saying and I disagree.  Read the rest of what Isaac and I were
> discussing.  He was missing a group from his definitions and I was trying to
> make sense of "frontend" being that missing group.  ;)  IOW, both of us were
> a bit confused .. ;)