| 1 |
On Sunday 06 May 2007 3:28:41 pm Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, 6 May 2007 15:19:53 -0400 |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Dan Meltzer <hydrogen@×××××××××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > On Sunday 06 May 2007 3:02:38 pm Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 6 |
> > > On Sun, 6 May 2007 14:53:22 -0400 |
| 7 |
> > > |
| 8 |
> > > Dan Meltzer <hydrogen@×××××××××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 9 |
> > > > > One of the reasons GLEP 42 was necessary was because users |
| 10 |
> > > > > *don't* read things delivered by other methods. |
| 11 |
> > > > |
| 12 |
> > > > And they are magically going to read the news? |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> > Experience being two news items about one package. Expand this to a |
| 15 |
> > tree size, where the user has around 400-500 packages. If they get |
| 16 |
> > news about changes that will increase their experience for each one |
| 17 |
> > of these, they are looking at reading the New York Times of gentoo |
| 18 |
> > every day. It's not going to happen. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> And, if that happens (which it won't), we'll have more experience and |
| 21 |
> we can evaluate future news items based upon that. A more realistic |
| 22 |
> view for your typical user is less than a news item per week. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
And what are you basing this on? |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> > > Paludis users do not consider that news item trivial. |
| 27 |
> > |
| 28 |
> > If I was a paludis user I would considder this trivial. The same |
| 29 |
> > information is availible a) from the package itself. b) from the |
| 30 |
> > changelog, and c) it still works without the change! |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> But you aren't, and those who are disagree. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
I've yet to here from the "those who are" otherwise yet. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Would the thoses who are be the same ones that you called idiots for writing |
| 37 |
horrible hooks that broke their system? or would this be a different group of |
| 38 |
those who ares? |
| 39 |
-- |
| 40 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives