Well said, Aaron. I'll compress it down to this. A script author's fate is
up to them.
Tom
----- Original Message -----
From: "Aaron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I'll chime in here as well, seeing as how SC is my baby. Posting what's
changed in a script update is really up to the script author, and is not
something that should be required. If you don't trust a script because of
a lack of update information, or are not comfortable installing a script
without knowing what's new, then don't use it. The open community model
that SC provides will control the success of a script. If enough people
stop using a script because they're not being told what it does, or what
changes have been made, then the script author may need to re-evaluate his
or her approach.
Personally, I try to include at least a small snippet of all the changes I
make between versions. Not only does it create a constructive dialog with
my users about what I'm doing (especially for those who are not subscribed
to any GW email list), it helps me keep track of what I've done. This
provides me with a sort of development history. It's easy for me to review
the changes that have been made because I take the time to note them. I
also feel that the change history is part of script development. To me, a
script is not completed when the package is created, but instead is
completed when the package is made available to users. When that happens,
I feel I should tell them why I'm bothing them with an update in the first
place. The time I spend developing a script is no more important the the
time someone takes to download, install, and use my script. I try to keep
that in mind when providing updates, and so far, I think it's going well.
Aaron
-----Original Message-----
From: "J.J. Meddaugh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Date: 09/22/08 22:48
Subject: Re: New Direct Text package
I have to agree. Each author has their own way of expressing changes to a
script.
I'm considering going to an external changelog linked to on my scripts,
for
example.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jared Wright" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 10:45 PM
Subject: Re: New Direct Text package
Darrell Shandrow wrote:
"I'd go so far as to say that a change log or release notes ought to,
somehow, be required by GW Micro in order to post on SC..."
Somehow I think this would only drive people away from SC and thus
neutralize its SC's usefulness as a whole.
JW
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
signature database 3462 (20080923) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
