On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Martijn Faassen <faas...@startifact.com> wrote: > Martin v. Löwis wrote: >>> >>> In this discussion, I placed a comment in the zope.app.sqlscript thread >>> to point to more modern ways to integrate the Zope Toolkit with >>> relational databases. This comment (along with many others) is now lost >>> because the original person deleted his comment and then recreated it. >> >> It's not completely lost, as there still is a log of it somewhere. So if >> you need the actual text, please let me know. > > Thanks, but that isn't a problem. > >>> The current design therefore gives the commenter the power to destroy >>> responses by package owners. And... >> >> That's true, and unfortunate. Can you propose an alternative approach >> (short of removing the comment facility altogether)? > > Perhaps when someone removes their comment it will say "comment removed" > (and the commenter's name could be eliminated as well). The followups would > remain in-tact this way. That isn't the complete context of course for > future readers, but better than nothing. > >>>> - Because I'm marked as a "Package Index Owner", I can't rate or >>>> independently comment on this package, even though I'm not its >>>> maintainer, I'm just someone who's volunteered to take responsibility >>>> for releasing a load of zope-related eggs when no-one else is around. >>> >>> Happened to me too. >> >> Not sure what exactly happened: that you wanted to rate, and couldn't, >> or that you wanted to comment, and couldn't? > > I wanted to comment, but couldn't. I can only reply to comments as a package > owner, not create new comments. > >> Why would you want to comment on the package, when you can put whatever >> you want to say into the packages' page? > > I wanted to comment on the package itself, because my comment got removed in > a comment on a comment. I wanted to put this information back in. > > Of course often updating the long description is an alternative to doing so. > But this would have been quite a bit more work than placing a comment; the > long description of this package is generated by setup.py of the package, > and it'd meant having to check out the package and doing a new description > upload. I just wanted to spend a minute to provide helpful information. > > [snip] >>> >>> If comment disabling is implemented, I think a nice feature might be to >>> repeat the author email metadata in its place (or perhaps a special >>> metadata field for diccussion forums). This way someone who wants to >>> comment on the package gets a clear indication of where they can to go. >> >> This I cannot understand. Can you rephrase? > > If it's possible to disable comments on a per-package basis, it might be > useful to say in the UI: > > "If you want to comment on this package, please use the following forum: > <mailing list address or http link>."
Note that I have introduced three new fields in PEP 345 to help on this (after I have read Catalog-SIG threads on the commenting issues -- someone suggested them): http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0345 # Repository-URL # Repository-Browser-URL # Bug-Tracker-URL Any feedback is welcome about it at Distutils-SIG, if you see anything else that could be done at the metadata level (then used and highlighted by PyPI) Regards, Tarek _______________________________________________ Catalog-SIG mailing list Catalog-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
