Am 03.11.2009 um 22:49 schrieb Martin v. Löwis:
-1 That would defeat the purpose of being able to channel feedback
to an
alternative location, e.g. the dedicated issue trackers for my
packages.
Please understand that the purpose of the commenting system is *not*
to report bugs, but to let users voice their genuine opinion about the
package. Telling them to use the tracker is, IMO, depriving them of
their right to explain their evaluation of the package; a bug
tracker is
not an adequate means for that.
First, I should note that I'm the last person who wants to deprive the
users of my packages of their right to tell the world how good or bad
the packages are. That's just ridiculous.
But - and please don't take this as an offense - I disagree with the
idea of a package index which introduces a notion of quality by using
rating and comments because they are subjective and occasionally
sketchy.
I don't really mind PyPI being "just" an index of Python software in
contrast to a troll atracting site like download.com, softpedia.com or macupdate.com
. I like that it's the infrastructue we rely on in buildout and pip
but wonder if user feedback is really required for that.
Why not create a separate site with ratings and comments, along the
lines of Jacob's cheeserater.com (now defunct) or Plone's software
center?
Jannis
_______________________________________________
Catalog-SIG mailing list
Catalog-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
