Bug#905393:
On 2018년 08월 10일 17:40, Thomas Lange wrote: OK, we have ONE person that still likes newsgroups. But nevertheless most newsgroups (except two) are outdated and do not have useful information any more. Can we remove the outdated newsgroups? I would like to focus on less information which are up to date, instead of collecting a lot of outdated links. At least, don't remove [linux.debian.*] and [Gmane], please...
Bug#905393:
Hi, On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 03:27:32PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: > On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 10:49:55PM +0900, Byung-Hee HWANG (황병희, 黃炳熙) wrote: > >Thomas Lange writes: > > > >> OK, we have ONE person that still likes newsgroups. But nevertheless > >> most newsgroups (except two) are outdated and do not have useful > >> information any more. Can we remove the outdated newsgroups? > >> > >> I would like to focus on less information which are up to date, > >> instead of collecting a lot of outdated links. > > > >Well i think old history are valuable for people. So it is enough to add > >label (historic) to the outdated links, i think. > > > >Still removing is dangerous. > > No, I strongly disagree. We have way too much out-of-date stuff on the > website, which makes it difficult for people to find useful, relevant > information. It's way past time we cleared out. I agree with Steve. Any documents which is older than years and is without updates are very likely not useful. Osamu
Bug#905393:
On Fri, 2018-08-10 at 10:40 +0200, Thomas Lange wrote: > OK, we have ONE person that still likes newsgroups. Correction, one person that likes newsgroups, follows www.debian.org bug reports and is up-to-date on their reading. The intersection of those sets of people is unlikely to be large. > Can we remove the outdated newsgroups? Seems reasonable to me but I'm unable to judge which should be removed. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#905393:
Thanks for feedback, Steve^^^ Steve McIntyre writes: > On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 10:49:55PM +0900, Byung-Hee HWANG (황병희, 黃炳熙) wrote: >>Thomas Lange writes: >> >>> OK, we have ONE person that still likes newsgroups. But nevertheless >>> most newsgroups (except two) are outdated and do not have useful >>> information any more. Can we remove the outdated newsgroups? >>> >>> I would like to focus on less information which are up to date, >>> instead of collecting a lot of outdated links. >> >>Well i think old history are valuable for people. So it is enough to add >>label (historic) to the outdated links, i think. >> >>Still removing is dangerous. > > No, I strongly disagree. We have way too much out-of-date stuff on the > website, which makes it difficult for people to find useful, relevant > information. It's way past time we cleared out. Of course, i don't object removing on absolute useless stuff. However i think Newsgroups/Usenet stuff are still useful resources. This is final feedback, thanks^^^ -- ^고맙습니다 _地平天成_ 감사합니다_^))//
Bug#905393:
On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 10:49:55PM +0900, Byung-Hee HWANG (황병희, 黃炳熙) wrote: >Thomas Lange writes: > >> OK, we have ONE person that still likes newsgroups. But nevertheless >> most newsgroups (except two) are outdated and do not have useful >> information any more. Can we remove the outdated newsgroups? >> >> I would like to focus on less information which are up to date, >> instead of collecting a lot of outdated links. > >Well i think old history are valuable for people. So it is enough to add >label (historic) to the outdated links, i think. > >Still removing is dangerous. No, I strongly disagree. We have way too much out-of-date stuff on the website, which makes it difficult for people to find useful, relevant information. It's way past time we cleared out. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com You raise the blade, you make the change... You re-arrange me 'til I'm sane...
Bug#905393:
Thomas Lange writes: > OK, we have ONE person that still likes newsgroups. But nevertheless > most newsgroups (except two) are outdated and do not have useful > information any more. Can we remove the outdated newsgroups? > > I would like to focus on less information which are up to date, > instead of collecting a lot of outdated links. Well i think old history are valuable for people. So it is enough to add label (historic) to the outdated links, i think. Still removing is dangerous. Sincerely, Byung-Hee. -- ^고맙습니다 _地平天成_ 감사합니다_^))//
Bug#905393:
OK, we have ONE person that still likes newsgroups. But nevertheless most newsgroups (except two) are outdated and do not have useful information any more. Can we remove the outdated newsgroups? I would like to focus on less information which are up to date, instead of collecting a lot of outdated links. -- regards Thomas
Bug#905393:
On Sat, 4 Aug 2018 14:03:19 +0900 황병희 (soyeomul) wrote: > Still somebody are there usenet/newsgroup via NNTP. We got a clarification from soyeomul on #debian-www: To #905393, i did send feedback for days ago, really i like usenet/newsgroups, i don't want to remove that. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#905393:
Still somebody are there usenet/newsgroup via NNTP.
Bug#905393: newsgroups section is mostly outdated
Package: www.debian.org Severity: whishlist On the page https://www.debian.org/support mostly all links to the newsgroups are needless, because except for comp.os.linux.networking comp.os.linux.misc those newsgroups are stalled. Please remove whole part about newsgroups or remove at least the link to the newsgroup and only keep some short general information about newsgroups. If you accept this change, I'm happy to create a merge request for it.
