Timeline for An argument for the Unix-specific programming questions: site quality
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
38 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 15, 2020 at 15:42 | comment | added | Tim | Thanks for asking for including Unix/Linux programming questions. It is a request by more than just you. Please keep up the push, and give some support here unix.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5697/…, so that it can become visible | |
| Feb 19, 2016 at 22:59 | answer | added | Faheem Mitha | timeline score: 4 | |
| Nov 26, 2015 at 14:07 | history | edited | terdonMod |
edited tags
|
|
| Sep 24, 2015 at 20:57 | comment | added | peterh | @terdonAs you can see on the meta, the community isn't engaged to modify the rule on the spot, many of them don't even understand it correctly. It is highly unfortunate, and it seems unsolvable. I would leave this suggestion as a signpost for the googlers of the future, maybe sometimes we will have enough support to change this harmful directive. | |
| Sep 23, 2015 at 16:55 | comment | added | terdon Mod | @peterh not as far as I know, no. In any case, that wouldn't even be possible. A site's scope is defined by the site's community, not SE and not the mods. I'm just pointing out that part of what you seem to be asking for is already here. Then, as a regular user, I personally don't want C programming to be on topic here but that's just my own opinion. | |
| Sep 23, 2015 at 15:45 | comment | added | peterh | @terdon "Asking about which library/system call to use is fine, asking about how exactly you can use it in your program is not." The second part is actually a rubber paragraph, a trap: it filters out the clearly formulated questions, while allows the unclear ones (which could be still closed as unclear). Does an intra-mod agreement, or a said or unsaid rule from the CMs exist which tries to minimize the programming content out of the SO? | |
| Sep 23, 2015 at 14:23 | comment | added | terdon Mod | Actually, the Unix API is on topic. What's not on topic is asking about the details of implementing something in C. Asking about which library/system call to use is fine, asking about how exactly you can use it in your program is not. This site's scope is more about system administration and configuration than about hard core programming. | |
| Sep 21, 2015 at 4:12 | history | edited | peterh | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 32 characters in body
|
| Sep 21, 2015 at 3:58 | comment | added | peterh | @cas Why? Unix-unix. I would find any topic about Unix very interesting. Forbidding Unix programming on a Unix site, this is what I find disattractive. | |
| Sep 21, 2015 at 3:56 | comment | added | cas | It sounds like you are, or should be, arguing for a Unix & Linux Programming SE. No matter how unix programming and API questions are treated here, they'll be swamped by all the other questions, defeating your goal of attracting highly-qualified experts in *nix programming. | |
| Sep 21, 2015 at 3:50 | history | edited | peterh | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 215 characters in body
|
| Sep 21, 2015 at 3:46 | comment | added | peterh | @cas I already said twice, that my suggestion is exactly the same: because expert content attracts also enthusiast questions (but not the other way around). The current site policy expels a large part of the expert questions saying that "programming questions are belonging to the SO", although these could attract more questions on every skill level. The goal is to attract more new users (on every skill level!), which happens more effectively if there is also programming content here. | |
| Sep 21, 2015 at 3:32 | comment | added | cas | newbies asking good but trivial questions is an opportunity to pass on the 'lore' to the next generation, not just to the asker but to anyone else who reads it. Some newbies and some readers will become the next generation of experts. | |
| Sep 20, 2015 at 23:02 | comment | added | peterh | @slm Thank you :-) | |
| Sep 20, 2015 at 23:00 | history | edited | peterh | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 395 characters in body
|
| Sep 20, 2015 at 22:27 | comment | added | peterh | @muru My answer after reading your referenced topic: no, it is not about any type of "supression" or scripting, shell programming, etc. My argument is to extend the site, with high-level content - partially with the goal to attract more enthusiast-level scripting/config questions, too. This is what the area51 faq also says: expert content attracts enhusiasts, but enthusisast content doesn't attract experts. There is no such thing as "low end OR elitist" site, this is not mathoverflow. There is a BIG site, all about *x, with many questions, this what I want. | |
| Sep 20, 2015 at 22:20 | comment | added | peterh | @muru Well, it seems I completely misunderstood you.I am sorry. | |
| Sep 20, 2015 at 20:33 | comment | added | muru | @peterh my stance is expressed by the upvote I made. The comments are pointers to how other Stack Exchange sites deal with this, so that we can learn from it, nothing more. | |
| Sep 20, 2015 at 20:30 | comment | added | peterh | @muru No. :-) Unfortunately, it is simply not clear to me, what is your stance about the expelling of the unix programmers from the Unix SE. You didn't make it clear in your 5 comments. Honestly, I really won't debate about askubuntu and other sites. I want to debate about the expelling of the programmers from the Unix SE. | |
| Sep 20, 2015 at 20:25 | comment | added | peterh | @muru (Reacting this) It is not about elitism, it is only about to not expelling the experts. | |
| Sep 20, 2015 at 20:23 | comment | added | peterh | @muru Your comment is completely unrelated to the subject, I would suggest to read the original post again. This post is not about the "askubuntu" site, this post is about that we shouldn't expel the experts to the SO. | |
| Sep 20, 2015 at 19:11 | comment | added | muru | Also related: programming Ubuntu apps is on-topic on Ask Ubuntu (you'll see quite a few QML questions there). The on-topic section has the overly broad "Development on Ubuntu" line, but in practice, it usually comes out to allowing questions on Ubuntu-specific APIs. | |
| Sep 20, 2015 at 19:05 | comment | added | muru | @peterh no, Barmar is right in that FAQ is a bit idealistic. For example, another site which had a debate about "expert"ness is English Language & Usage: meta.english.stackexchange.com/questions/4491/… | |
| Sep 20, 2015 at 18:37 | history | edited | slmMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 3 characters in body
|
| Sep 20, 2015 at 16:57 | comment | added | peterh | @Barmar 1) SO is far over the critical mass needed for the long-term survival, unix SE isn't 2) There are a lot of high-level expert questions there as well, here it is forbidden 3) I think you didn't read the Area51 FAQ I've linked, maybe you should. 4) My argument is about the quality of the site, and not about its survival. | |
| Sep 20, 2015 at 16:55 | comment | added | Barmar | I think that FAQ betrays an idealistic attitude about StackExchange sites that hasn't been achieved in general. When I first joined SO, I thought it was going to be expert (or at least experienced) programmers helping each other with challenging problems. I've since learned that at least 90% of the questions come from newbies needing everything spoon-fed to them. Yet the site hasn't failed due to lack of experts. | |
| Sep 20, 2015 at 16:39 | comment | added | peterh | @Barmar No. Trivial scripting and tool/daemon configuration won't attract them. Maybe you should read that Area51 FAQ I've linked. | |
| Sep 20, 2015 at 16:38 | comment | added | Barmar | It's not a zero-sum game. Unix experts can participate on both forums: SO for programming questions, UL for design and usage questions. | |
| Sep 20, 2015 at 14:10 | comment | added | peterh | @Barmar Then you agree to lose the experts of the area. I am really wondering, for example, why should we send a kernel developer to the SO. | |
| Sep 20, 2015 at 5:20 | comment | added | Barmar | I agree with #3 -- that relates more to the internal design of Unix and Unix applications. But questions about how to write programs belong on SO, even if it's specific to Unix. | |
| Sep 20, 2015 at 0:20 | comment | added | peterh | @EricRenouf Yes, they are currently closed or migrated to SO, although the help center says libc / posix things are ontopic even if they are about programming. Related meta posts have mainly a negative consensus in this question, this is what I would like to change. | |
| Sep 20, 2015 at 0:18 | comment | added | Eric Renouf | I was just wondering why you would list a set of programming things as what should be allowed, these then are just additional topics that you think right now would be migrated to SO instead of left here then? | |
| Sep 20, 2015 at 0:15 | comment | added | peterh | @EricRenouf ??? I didn't write even any similar. | |
| Sep 20, 2015 at 0:14 | comment | added | Eric Renouf | Are you suggesting that configuring/administering a *nix system should be considered off topic? | |
| Sep 19, 2015 at 23:14 | history | edited | peterh | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 1 character in body
|
| Sep 19, 2015 at 23:04 | history | edited | peterh | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 29 characters in body
|
| Sep 19, 2015 at 22:58 | history | edited | peterh | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 10 characters in body
|
| Sep 19, 2015 at 22:51 | history | asked | peterh | CC BY-SA 3.0 |