1 |
Ivan Yosifov wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
> I agree that no one wants to get too much irrelevant mail. However if |
4 |
> there is a single dev list where improvements (and not user problems) |
5 |
> are discussed there will usually be several threads that just keep |
6 |
> growing. AFAIK Thunderbird (which you appear to be using) supports |
7 |
> message folding and threading. So if there are a dozen messages under |
8 |
> the XOrg message tree you can quickly tell that they are not for you. I |
9 |
> mean that just because there are 100 messages more , does not mean you |
10 |
> will need more than 10 seconds to filter them all. |
11 |
|
12 |
Yes, it does, and I use it. But the problem is, that many problems |
13 |
(especially those you are talking about) are not that clearly assigned |
14 |
to one herd/project. What about a user that finds an error in our |
15 |
amd64-specific documentation? Depending on his subject (i.e. "Found |
16 |
error in doc" or "amd64 technotes contain errors") I will miss it or |
17 |
not. To ensure I don't miss them (as I don't want users feel ignored) |
18 |
I'd have to read them, and that's the problem. You say: "You can't |
19 |
expect form a user to see the amd64 TCP/IP stack bug when all he knows |
20 |
is that gaim can not connect." Of course we can't. But the user that |
21 |
can't figure that out won't write a subject like "amd64 tcp/ip stack is |
22 |
buggy", he'd write "why is gaim unable to connect?". I'd completely |
23 |
ignore this thread, because I really don't bother about gaim. Perhaps |
24 |
the gaim maintainer would figure out that this is amd64-specific, and he |
25 |
would say: "amd64-guys, could you have a look at that?". Very likely in |
26 |
the same thread, with the same (boring) subject, and I still would |
27 |
ignore it. The user would feel ignored, and that's not what anybody want. |
28 |
|
29 |
> I agree. What I meant was that sometimes users have ideas about |
30 |
> improving Gentoo (apart from fix bug #####). And such ideas (i think) |
31 |
> are for gentoo-dev. |
32 |
|
33 |
I thought you thought so. ;) |
34 |
|
35 |
> Mind your own example with app-foo/bar-1.0 on amd64. Most bugs (and |
36 |
> problems) are arch independent. Especially problems like "How do I use |
37 |
> this app" , or "where is this in the gnome menu". And these are the |
38 |
> problems a user is likely to ask help for. You can't expect form a user |
39 |
> to see the amd64 TCP/IP stack bug when all he knows is that gaim can not |
40 |
> connect. I believe that ppc,amd64,x86,etc users (and lists ) have more |
41 |
> experience to share than arch specific stuff. |
42 |
|
43 |
see above. This is a very good example: The error could be a |
44 |
configuration error (interfaces, firewalls, even gaim), a bug in gaim or |
45 |
a bug in any other part of the OS related to internet connection. |
46 |
Someone will figure out where the error really is, but the responsible |
47 |
dev most likely will miss it. It's like spam: The more spam (unwanted |
48 |
mails) you want, the higher is the risk of missing an important information. |
49 |
|
50 |
|
51 |
> I understand. However something currently going on the java list may |
52 |
> very well have to do with amd64 , and you may never know about it. |
53 |
|
54 |
Right, but if a java dev finds out that it has something to do with |
55 |
amd64, he will contact us. And he will do that on #gentoo-amd64, |
56 |
amd64@g.o or gentoo-amd64@g.o, or even in a bug, but not |
57 |
on gentoo-java@g.o, as he knows that most of amd64 devs don't |
58 |
read the list (i dont know if this is true or not, at least i don't ;). |
59 |
If the whole thread would be on -dev, he probably would ask us to have a |
60 |
look at it in the same thread, because we're actually receiving this list. |
61 |
|
62 |
Another aspect could be bandwith: I know there are a few devs that are |
63 |
not reading/receiving -dev because it has such a high amount of traffic. |
64 |
Not everybody has a 1MB flatrate, there are still some people that have |
65 |
to use a 32kbit dialup. |
66 |
|
67 |
Greetings, |
68 |
|
69 |
blubb |