On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 14:46:05 +0200, Daniel Carrera wrote: > Before I say anything else, are you happy with "patch reordering"? I can > go for that if you think it's really better.
I can't speak for Stephen, but "patch reordering" seems to have the right mix of conveying what we mean without making it sound magical or hyped up. >> This UI-based appeal seems a little dull if you've drunk the "patch >> theory" Kool-Aid, but the point of the home page and most related top >> pages is to appeal to those who haven't gotten on to patch theory yet. > > Do notice that I have been trying to suggest alternate ways to convey > what makes darcs special without saying "patch theory". Please give me > some credit for that. We wouldn't be having this discussion if it > weren't because I decided to help with documentation and remove patch > theory from the front page. So this discussion seems to mix tactics (choice of words) with strategy (choice of things to say). Aside from the tactical point (not saying "patch theory"), it sounds like Stephen is making a wider strategic point that no matter what phrasing we use, we should avoid using the /idea/ of a patch theory to sell darcs to prospective new users. Having eagerly partaken of the Kool-Aid, I find this to be a painful step but one which we will probably be happy to have taken in the long run. Maybe we really should stop trying to say that darcs is smart and focus on the fact that it is very easy to use, that it has a unique user interface that lets pick and choose patches without any fuss (maybe we can talk more about a notion of selective undo). It's a very delicate balancing act. But I think once we do figure this out, we'll hit on that certain cool, low-key professionalism that just *feels* right... -- Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow> PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
