PieFed Meta

4756 readers

2 users here now

Discuss PieFed project direction, provide feedback, ask questions, suggest improvements, and engage in conversations related to the platform organization, policies, features, and community dynamics.

Wiki

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

rimu@piefed.social

What worked at 100 users broke at 5,000 (join.piefed.social)

submitted 1 month ago by rimu@piefed.social to c/piefed_meta@piefed.social

37 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Blaze@piefed.zip 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Chats still have their value before getting to Codeberg.

Codeberg is nice to track the work.

They all have their use.

[–] ex_06@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

no one said to not use codeberg, i just said to deactivate issues there

unifying the place where people talk and report

some people prioritize the git forge for this and leave out the rest, but this basically says ''we don't want you'' to all non developers

[–] Blaze@piefed.zip 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Deactivitating issues there would hide visibility on the work being done and planned.

This is the 1.7 roadmap: https://codeberg.org/rimu/pyfedi/projects/37608

It helps to see what is being worked on.

but this basically says ‘’we don’t want you’’ to all non developers

Everyone is welcome to discuss things on !piefed_dev@piefed.social , the Zulip or Matrix groups.

[–] ex_06@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 month ago

Everyone is welcome to discuss things on !piefed_dev@piefed.social , the Zulip or Matrix groups.

yes, but we would go back to having more sources of truth that are heavier on the devs, even because of the repetitions and scattering of the same topics

why do you take single part of my message and answer to them like they are not part of the whole message blaze :(

first i said that single source of truth etc and then i pointed out that the single source has not to be dev oriented, don't answer to my second point with the issue of the first point

Deactivitating issues there would hide visibility on the work being done and planned

that is not true, there are a lot of kanbans and ticketing software that can be used; to be fair, i should have said deactivating the possibility to open and comment except by mantainers

and in the system i proposed, you could still join and comment issues and features on piefed anyway (if you are not one of the piefed people)

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Honestly if I was working as a dev in the project I think I would like a point where its just devs talking. When I mention stuff or whatnot I realize im peanut gallery. Its important to get input from the full community but at some point you should narrow down when it comes to actually deciding on what stuff to do. I do see wisdom in not having stuff to fractured though. I personally would like to see all greater community discussion be done in a community and Im not part of development but I think it would be good to limit that to one thing.

[–] Blaze@piefed.social 3 points 1 month ago

I think it would be good to limit that to one thing.

There's definitely a different feeling between a public Piefed community, the Matrix/Zulip chats with a small group of enthusiasts, and then the Codeberg where people discuss specific technical topics on one issue.

Having the different feelings/vibes help to have different people finding which one they prefer.