Le 2010-10-24 20:19, Wayne Sallee a écrit :
Michael Scherer wrote on 10/23/2010 08:52 PM:
Le dimanche 24 octobre 2010 à 02:09 +0200, Tux99 a écrit :
Come on... the effort of adding a decent description is minimal for a
packager, the effort for a normal user of making a patch is much
higher, this is not a very friendly answer towards the users...
I think I demonstrated in the past that constant friendliness toward
users is not one of my distinctive characteristics.
The patch arguent is invalid, because people can also send mail, like
"here is a better description of package $FOO because I didn't
understood the current one and I wanted to help".
So while sending a email and finding the packager email can be hard for
some people, I doubt that sending a email is hard for everybody.
If writing a decent description is easy and almost effortless, and if
sending a email is easy, then what is difficult into doing both ?
I agree that it is only logical to contribute by e-mailing the packager
about an improvement need in the package, but some packagers don't want
you e-mailing them about their package.
As a community distro, we want to try to make it comfortable and easy
for everyone to get involved.
Knowing that many packagers are not going to want you e-mailing them
about their package, reduces the number of people that will take the
time to e-mail them with such contribution. Of course what makes it
easier for one, makes it harder for another, so there needs to be
balance there. Sometimes our expectations are expecting too much from
the other who is working a lot of thankless hours to keep the distro going.
It's all about balance and efficiency, and making it easy for people to
start contributing, and realizing that some jobs are more time consuming
than we might think.
Developing systems and protocols help keep things running efficient, and
moving forward.
Wayne Sallee
[email protected]
All of this talk about descriptions make it sound like there should be
more of a formalized process whereby:
* the packager gets the package ready
*when the package is ready (in Cauldron) a message is sent out to a team
of "package description users" who make arrangements for the updated
description and translations to be included with the package
* when the updated description and package are ready they are then
processed as per usual
I think that it is pretty clear that packagers don't really want to deal
with updating description, but the users would like to have updated
descriptions. So, what if there was a group of users in charge of
updating the package descriptions/translations where needed? Would this
work?
Marc
