Stef wrote in reply to: >On Nov 18, 2010, at 5:53 PM, Stephan Eggermont wrote: >>That doesn't help with the web interface; >?? As I said, I often browse http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/pharo-project/2010-November/
>>But you just get a bad summary from squeak-source I have to click on the link >>all the time. But then you at least get to see the whole discussion instead of one line. > - Filtering doesn't work with digests; >>I do not understand The mailing list has a digest function. Most email clients do not know how to filter them. > - The subject is not good and the content is not good for a mailing list; >>Why >>Bugs are our concerns I fully agree that bugs are our concern, and that it is important to make activity visible. I also understand and share your frustration that bug reports are badly read and written. I just think that this works contra-productive. - the subject of a feed message is bad: it is just the issue number and the issue title, instead of adding what happened with the issue. - the content of a feed message is bad: the context is missing. > - It reduces the searchability/usability of the mailing list archives; >>Why? >>I want to look for bug discussions there too and not using a bad google >>search engine. I think the problem most potential contributors have is one of too much information, not too little. Giving them more, in a badly prepared format, is unlikely to help. Stephan
