1 |
Hi, |
2 |
|
3 |
OK guys , it appears that I was wrong. My impressions that too many |
4 |
lists bring only confusion are only partially correct and the proposed |
5 |
solution will apparently bring more problems than it will solve. |
6 |
Closing bug 73642 as WONTFIX. Thanks for your comments. |
7 |
|
8 |
Ivan Yosifov. |
9 |
|
10 |
On Tue, 2004-12-07 at 20:31 +0100, Simon Stelling wrote: |
11 |
> Ivan Yosifov wrote: |
12 |
> |
13 |
> > I agree that no one wants to get too much irrelevant mail. However if |
14 |
> > there is a single dev list where improvements (and not user problems) |
15 |
> > are discussed there will usually be several threads that just keep |
16 |
> > growing. AFAIK Thunderbird (which you appear to be using) supports |
17 |
> > message folding and threading. So if there are a dozen messages under |
18 |
> > the XOrg message tree you can quickly tell that they are not for you. I |
19 |
> > mean that just because there are 100 messages more , does not mean you |
20 |
> > will need more than 10 seconds to filter them all. |
21 |
> |
22 |
> Yes, it does, and I use it. But the problem is, that many problems |
23 |
> (especially those you are talking about) are not that clearly assigned |
24 |
> to one herd/project. What about a user that finds an error in our |
25 |
> amd64-specific documentation? Depending on his subject (i.e. "Found |
26 |
> error in doc" or "amd64 technotes contain errors") I will miss it or |
27 |
> not. To ensure I don't miss them (as I don't want users feel ignored) |
28 |
> I'd have to read them, and that's the problem. You say: "You can't |
29 |
> expect form a user to see the amd64 TCP/IP stack bug when all he knows |
30 |
> is that gaim can not connect." Of course we can't. But the user that |
31 |
> can't figure that out won't write a subject like "amd64 tcp/ip stack is |
32 |
> buggy", he'd write "why is gaim unable to connect?". I'd completely |
33 |
> ignore this thread, because I really don't bother about gaim. Perhaps |
34 |
> the gaim maintainer would figure out that this is amd64-specific, and he |
35 |
> would say: "amd64-guys, could you have a look at that?". Very likely in |
36 |
> the same thread, with the same (boring) subject, and I still would |
37 |
> ignore it. The user would feel ignored, and that's not what anybody want. |
38 |
> |
39 |
> > I agree. What I meant was that sometimes users have ideas about |
40 |
> > improving Gentoo (apart from fix bug #####). And such ideas (i think) |
41 |
> > are for gentoo-dev. |
42 |
> |
43 |
> I thought you thought so. ;) |
44 |
> |
45 |
> > Mind your own example with app-foo/bar-1.0 on amd64. Most bugs (and |
46 |
> > problems) are arch independent. Especially problems like "How do I use |
47 |
> > this app" , or "where is this in the gnome menu". And these are the |
48 |
> > problems a user is likely to ask help for. You can't expect form a user |
49 |
> > to see the amd64 TCP/IP stack bug when all he knows is that gaim can not |
50 |
> > connect. I believe that ppc,amd64,x86,etc users (and lists ) have more |
51 |
> > experience to share than arch specific stuff. |
52 |
> |
53 |
> see above. This is a very good example: The error could be a |
54 |
> configuration error (interfaces, firewalls, even gaim), a bug in gaim or |
55 |
> a bug in any other part of the OS related to internet connection. |
56 |
> Someone will figure out where the error really is, but the responsible |
57 |
> dev most likely will miss it. It's like spam: The more spam (unwanted |
58 |
> mails) you want, the higher is the risk of missing an important information. |
59 |
> |
60 |
> |
61 |
> > I understand. However something currently going on the java list may |
62 |
> > very well have to do with amd64 , and you may never know about it. |
63 |
> |
64 |
> Right, but if a java dev finds out that it has something to do with |
65 |
> amd64, he will contact us. And he will do that on #gentoo-amd64, |
66 |
> amd64@g.o or gentoo-amd64@g.o, or even in a bug, but not |
67 |
> on gentoo-java@g.o, as he knows that most of amd64 devs don't |
68 |
> read the list (i dont know if this is true or not, at least i don't ;). |
69 |
> If the whole thread would be on -dev, he probably would ask us to have a |
70 |
> look at it in the same thread, because we're actually receiving this list. |
71 |
> |
72 |
> Another aspect could be bandwith: I know there are a few devs that are |
73 |
> not reading/receiving -dev because it has such a high amount of traffic. |
74 |
> Not everybody has a 1MB flatrate, there are still some people that have |
75 |
> to use a 32kbit dialup. |
76 |
> |
77 |
> Greetings, |
78 |
> |
79 |
> blubb |
80 |
|
81 |
|
82 |
|
83 |
-- |
84 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |