|
|
|
|
|
|
by ku1ik
20 days ago
|
|
|
As the author of asciinema I'm flattered that Rodrigo considers asciinema as a potentially useful tool for this problem. This solution would likely apply to a small subset of contributors, unless most Dillo hackers are terminal editor users, and would probably help only partially (which he acknowledges in the post). I guess partially is still better than not at all. Setting aside the technical aspect, I wonder how practical it would be to review long asciinema sessions when reviewing a patch. If you're reading this Rodrigo: is your recording verification idea to just quickly eyeball / skim through a recording to catch human behavior in those sessions? Or maybe something more elaborate? Btw, I'm not taking sides here, just happy to see asciinema in the wild :) |
|
|
Is nice :)
> unless most Dillo hackers are terminal editor users
My guess is that it is mostly the case, but I wouldn't mind if someone prefers video or something equivalent.
> is your recording verification idea to just quickly eyeball / skim through a recording to catch human behavior in those sessions?
In my limited tests with myself I think I can gather a "strong human signal" by just skimming at high speed through the session. But I wanted to gather some quick feedback before I continue with the idea.
> I'm not taking sides here
On of the aspects that I didn't cover in the post is that recording the session will make people unconfortable (at least to some degree). Some will be okay with it, some not.
I don't think it is acceptable to make contributors unconfortable, so I'm not sure if that is enough to ditch the idea.