Perhaps you could consider a small "help" or "faq" in the main menu.
Thanks for your work.
:m)
]]>This is a symptom of a registration that wasn't completed successfully. You have a user record, but you're missing either a blog record or the permission record that links your user to your blog.
Drop me an email (dave[at]dave[dot]org[dot]uk) with your username and I'll investigate further.
]]>my suggestion for a change in BioPerl would be to change the module build process from your custom build system to either ExtUtils::MakeMaker or Module::Build.
It could save significant time to people hunting bugs in BioPerl (like me trying to fix Win32 compatibility couple of months ago)
--
kmx
1) I open "What are BioPerl's weaknesses?"
2) Fill my comment
3) Click Preview
4) Click Submit
And in the end I posted my comment here instead of BioPerl related post.
--
kmx
When I tried to register from a user blog, it kept complaining about "text is wrong". After several futile attempts I tried again from the front page, and this time it showed a captcha. Aha!
So, when trying to register from a user page, it doesn't show a captcha.
And yes, Javascript was enabled.
]]>I have most of my deliverables, but Mac is being such a problem that I don't know for sure if I am going to get a fully satisfactory answer; should I declare defeat? I think eventually I can figure something out, perhaps with the help of CPAN testers; should I preemptively declare victory. Having to answer to someone is both motivation (useful) and pressure (possible not so useful).
I also want to concur with Nick about the lag. I think that many more people, seeing a coming gap in time might want to take advantage, but it means that they would have to (a) have an idea about an itch in advance (b) not accidentally scratch it too early.
Some more "agile" system would likely produce more dividends. Whether quick turnaround of individual proposals or pre-established grants awaiting claimants (bounties, see above) I think Nick is right, the lag is a major problem.
]]>Of course there is a lot more work that can be done, I'll look into applying for a grant for next quarter (or sooner if the rules change).
]]>As Nicholas pointed out, the grants system is a bit arcane, and takes a fair amount of work and waiting, just to apply.
To everyone else: You'll never know if your idea/plan was good enough for a grant if you don't apply! Don't assume it isnt, ask!
]]>To be financed with grant there must really be a tangible, important benefit to community at large that cannot be achieved without grant. And this criteria leaves VERY FEW things appropriate to be financed with grant.
And most important such thing is a highly skilled work of core development (in light of recent development that interpreters of other languages have underwent, e.g. that spectacular JavaScript performance race, Perl 5 still has a room for improvement), but there is already Perl 5 maintenance fund dedicated to this end. Apart from that there are very few things worth financing with grants that will be the right use of scarce contributed funds, and people understand that, so probably that is why there are very few or no proposals.
And that is how it really should be. Only the best use of funds will motivate people to contribute money in the first place. If funds are spent on minor projects away from core needs of the community, we soon end up with no monetary contributions, as contributors will see no results that their money are worth of. So the general principle is that grants should be spend on something that contributors of most funds would approve.
This is perfectly OK to support development with funds raised from Perl community contributions. The only requirement is spending those funds to make (or foster) real technological advances of Perl (since we all depend on it), not just spend money on Perl projects.
]]>