| 1 |
On 29 March 2006 18:12, Schleimer, Ben wrote: |
| 2 |
> > Isn't the solution to have 3 levels: 'testing', |
| 3 |
> > 'probation' & 'stable' ? |
| 4 |
> > 'Testing' would be literally that, asking for |
| 5 |
> > feedback from users; |
| 6 |
> > 'probation' wb already tested for a defined period |
| 7 |
> > -- say 30 days -- |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> How about a crazier idea: |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Each package has a stability rating from 0-99 per |
| 12 |
> architecture. |
| 13 |
> 0 means totally untested/unstable and 99 means rock |
| 14 |
> solid/no bugs. (0-33~unstable, 34-66~testing, |
| 15 |
> 67-99~stable) |
| 16 |
> Each new package starts at 50. Whenever a user uses |
| 17 |
> the package, he can then vote on it by giving +1 or -1 |
| 18 |
> (on the website or through portage). |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Indeed, a crazy idea. Technical issues like stability, which technology to |
| 21 |
use, how to implement a certain functionality, whether a bug is fixed,... can |
| 22 |
not be subject to voting. Period. Someone actually has to look into the |
| 23 |
matter and decide on technical merits. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Otherwise we should start a similar voting system on weather. 0 means abosulte |
| 26 |
crap weather, 99 means weather to sire heroes. 0-33: cold, windy, rainy. |
| 27 |
34-66: so lala. 65-99: good weather. Each day start with 50 points at 00:00 |
| 28 |
sharp. Then the voting kicks in and we can all witness how the sun brightens |
| 29 |
over time. Except if you live in Namibia with all those farmers voting for |
| 30 |
rain. ;-) |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Uwe |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Why do consumers keep buying products they will live to curse? |
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives