On Sunday 22 June 2008 13:53, Daniel Stenberg wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Jun 2008, Antony Stone wrote:
> >> A) pointless request since there's an improvement most of the devs
> >> already could think of themselves
> >
> > I don't understand why, just because a developer could think of the idea
> > on his/her own, this makes it a pointless request?
>
> Yes I think so. I don't see how having a list of obvious ideas is helping
> anyone.
It helps because if people search and find the idea is already there, they
shouldn't enter it again.
If they do, that's a problem of user education, not the idea itself being
pointless.
> >> B) far-out idea that no dev is interested in.
> >
> > If this is a consensus of opinion and not just the feeling of a single
> > developer, why can't the request be marked as "too complex" or "too far
> > removed from Rockbox aims" so that people know that's what is thought of
> > it?
>
> Because killing an entry that is added is a lot harder and more work than
> preventing it from being entered in the first place. We kill entries all
> the time, but they keep coming back.
When you say "kill" do you mean "delete so they can't be seen again" or "mark
it as 'won't be done because X'" which can then be found if people search for
the idea in future?
Perhaps the solution is to make entry to the tracker system for a new posting
only possible after doing a search, and automatically including the terms the
user searched for into a field in the posting?
That should encourage more people to do sensible searches before posting
duplicate requests?
Antony.
--
"640 kilobytes (of RAM) should be enough for anybody."
- Bill Gates
Please reply to the list;
please don't CC me.
