On 21/12/10 18:52, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:
On Tue, 21 Dec 2010 16:08:03 +1000
Allan McRae<[email protected]> wrote:
On 21/12/10 15:53, Xyne wrote:
On 2010-12-21 12:14 +0800 (51:2)
Ng Oon-Ee wrote:
On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 13:22 +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
My view is that there is no need for informational post_install or
post_update messages (and I find those annoying in general...).
Especially given this obviously a svn snapshot for a branch that
has seen no release yet. I work on the assumption that the users
of Arch are not stupid[*] and know what they are installing on
their systems. They would have gone out of their way not to just
install the ardour package from the repos for a reason.
[*] well, lets just say I do to make this point... :P
Allan
Well from the POV of ardour's developers, ardour3 isn't even alpha
or pre-alpha yet, and this PKGBUILD just encourages those mythical
'stupid users' to try out something which isn't for general users
yet.
The problem here is that problems will be brought to them (the
ardour devs) rather than to this list or the comments on the AUR
package. If a post_install message alleviates that problem it's
all good, I think.
If a simple message is able to address the concerns expressed by
the upstream developer and encourage users to contribute to the
project then we should include it. It shows respect and costs
nothing.
How about a comment in the PKGBUILD then? Everybody reads the
PKGBUILD before blindly running makepkg, right...
Too many people ignore post_install/upgrade messages as it is because
of all the "useless" information in them. I think there usage should
be limited to absolutely critical information.
Allan
many people ignore those messages? that's silly. the solution for
preventing users ignoring reading warnings is not removing the warnings.
anyway, if you make it a warning - even if they ignore it - they will
*also* see it when they read the pkgbuild source.
No. The solution is not to warn the user for unimportant things so they
do not become desensitised to output from pacman.
PS: didn't you just say "I work on the assumption that the users of Arch
are not stupid" ?
I did follow that with an asterisk...
Allan
