2011/9/13 nem <[email protected]>: > > good day! > > recently i experienced some wild out-of-date flagging without any > comments or even backupped reasons for codelite [1] from different > users (even multiple times by the same) over the past two weeks. > someone has been kind enough to help me unflagging these. > > however this is not only very annoying without any reasons (comments or > email of the flaggers) whatsoever but also kind of lighted some concern > about the carelessness of how people are flagging. they don't seem to > even read the latest comments of the package or try to get a grasp of > their reasoning ([1] is the stable version. they probably want the svn > version which is also available). > > i thought about that and putting a fulltext description in the pkg-desc > field is probably not what it's meant to be. so what came to my mind > was a mandatory comment along with flagging to get an idea, why the > person thinks it's out of date. > that would make them think before flagging and also make them come back > and read the response and not flag it out-of-date again. > > anyone else having similar issues? or am i overreacting here? > > regards, > nem > > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=18809 >
IMO, shouldn't be mandatory. If you have a stable version package and user flags it because there is a new devel version or the PKGBUILD has a bug, then the problem is a misunderstanding of the OOD feature usage by the user. In this case, leave a educational comment.
