On Sunday 06 May 2007 3:28:41 pm Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sun, 6 May 2007 15:19:53 -0400 > > Dan Meltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sunday 06 May 2007 3:02:38 pm Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > > On Sun, 6 May 2007 14:53:22 -0400 > > > > > > Dan Meltzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > One of the reasons GLEP 42 was necessary was because users > > > > > *don't* read things delivered by other methods. > > > > > > > > And they are magically going to read the news? > > > > Experience being two news items about one package. Expand this to a > > tree size, where the user has around 400-500 packages. If they get > > news about changes that will increase their experience for each one > > of these, they are looking at reading the New York Times of gentoo > > every day. It's not going to happen. > > And, if that happens (which it won't), we'll have more experience and > we can evaluate future news items based upon that. A more realistic > view for your typical user is less than a news item per week.
And what are you basing this on? > > > > Paludis users do not consider that news item trivial. > > > > If I was a paludis user I would considder this trivial. The same > > information is availible a) from the package itself. b) from the > > changelog, and c) it still works without the change! > > But you aren't, and those who are disagree. I've yet to here from the "those who are" otherwise yet. Would the thoses who are be the same ones that you called idiots for writing horrible hooks that broke their system? or would this be a different group of those who ares? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
