Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 42 (Was: Getting Important Updates To Users)
On Monday 07 November 2005 19:11, Paul de Vrieze wrote: On Saturday 05 November 2005 06:34, Alec Warner wrote: emerge --changelog has no 'official' format. I believe echangelog actually puts the changes in the correct format for emerge -l to read, however not everyone uses echangelog. Many developers commit in an incompatable syntax causing the parsing to fail. This I believe, is an implementation issue. Obviously if someone is trying to get an upgrade guide to users they aren't going to commit in an incompatable format. I would also like to add that the changelog has too much information to be usefull as a news source. In all honesty, when I'm emerging a new version of a package I'm not interested in keyword bumps, small cosmetic changes, added auxiliary scripts or documentation. These are all documented (and should be) in the changelog. If I update my system however, I'm mainly interested in knowing whether something is going to break. News would be a way to provide this knowledge to a user in an as concise as possible way. So what's the point of the ChangeLog again? Move load from the CVS server and onto the rsync servers? (Don't answer that - just beating a dead horse ;) I'm really just against having it in emerge, especially with the current suggestion of portage just doing a little bit of maintenance work for external tools and nothing else. -- Jason Stubbs -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 42 (Was: Getting Important Updates To Users)
Jason Stubbs wrote: [Mon Nov 07 2005, 06:37:10AM CST] So what's the point of the ChangeLog again? Move load from the CVS server and onto the rsync servers? (Don't answer that - just beating a dead horse ;) *Grin* I'm going to answer anyway, since the answer isn't necessarily obvious to everybody. Once upon a time, the expectation was that the ChangeLog contained information about package modifications that would be of interest to users, while the CVS log would contain info mainly of interest to devs. Of course, that was when viewcvs accessed the live tree, too. Since then, there seems to have been a consensus that the CVS log should really be autogenerated from the ChangeLog, which itself is created using ``echangelog``. My view is that the ChangeLog should contain user-readable descriptions (although we also encourage some useful jargon such as version bump) of every change a package has undergone, providing a fairly complete history for that package that is much more readable than iterating through CVS diffs. Consequently, the ChangeLog has far too much information to realistically serve as a low-noise news source. (One could imagine tagging certain ChangeLog entries as being particularly important, but that forces news to be package based, and seems overly complicated, so please forget that I ever brought it up.) I'm really just against having it in emerge, especially with the current suggestion of portage just doing a little bit of maintenance work for external tools and nothing else. I'm not sure exactly what you're arguing here. Is it just that you think that the news stuff should be a post-sync hook instead of being triggered explicitly by emerge? -g2boojum- -- Grant Goodyear Gentoo Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76 pgpsn76RkqrpW.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 42 (Was: Getting Important Updates To Users)
On Tuesday 08 November 2005 01:06, Grant Goodyear wrote: Jason Stubbs wrote: [Mon Nov 07 2005, 06:37:10AM CST] I'm really just against having it in emerge, especially with the current suggestion of portage just doing a little bit of maintenance work for external tools and nothing else. I'm not sure exactly what you're arguing here. Is it just that you think that the news stuff should be a post-sync hook instead of being triggered explicitly by emerge? I just wrote several paragraphs but that got me thinking so I deleted 'em. Ok. There's two levels of APIs here. There's the post-sync stuff which utilizes portage's API. There'll never be any need for portage to utilize the post-sync stuff that I can think of; if there is, that's a reason for putting it into portage. The second layer is between the post-sync stuff and the news readers. Here we have a problem. As Brian mentioned, multiple independent repositories will be supported and each should be allowed to have it's own independent set of news items. Multiple repositories will bring new (or completely replace) portage APIs. Hence, the post-sync stuff will have to accomodate. Yet, that's going to propogate into the post-sync component's API provided for the readers. Multiple independent repositories is just one change that we know is going to throw a spanner in the works. There'll likely be others. Hmm, I think I've just discovered what's unsettling about all this. We're being asked to throw something into portage that'll do XYZ to support external tools, yet we are guaranteed to break the XYZ. I guess I'd be happy with portage doing it and responsibility for compatibility staying with portage as long as we can decide/lead how the external tools gains access to the information. -- Jason Stubbs -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 42 (Was: Getting Important Updates To Users)
On Mon, 2005-11-07 at 21:37 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: So what's the point of the ChangeLog again? Isn't it to record specific changes that have happened to a specific package? News items may be about changes that have not yet happened - to allow users to plan ahead and prepare appropriately. News items may also be about (possibly future) changes where there is no one corresponding package; equally a news item may be relevant for a large number of packages. In both of those circumstances, looking for news in a package-specific ChangeLog doesn't seem right to me. Feels to me to be both bad engineering and bad SCM practice. I'm really just against having it in emerge, especially with the current suggestion of portage just doing a little bit of maintenance work for external tools and nothing else. I can't think of any other place where we have every Gentoo user's attention to the same extent that we do when emerge outputs that reminder about any CONFIG_PROTECTed packages that need attention. It's the one and only place where we can reach every user. That is the whole purpose of this idea. We're trying to deliver the news to 100% of the user base, or as near as damn it. Best regards, Stu -- Stuart Herbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo Developer http://www.gentoo.org/ http://stu.gnqs.org/diary/ GnuGP key id# F9AFC57C available from http://pgp.mit.edu Key fingerprint = 31FB 50D4 1F88 E227 F319 C549 0C2F 80BA F9AF C57C -- signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 42 (Was: Getting Important Updates To Users)
On Saturday 05 November 2005 06:08, Jason Stubbs wrote: Why does `emerge --changelog` not suffice for package-specific news? From a user/sys.admin point of view let me give you an example; I maintain quite a lot Gentoo-systems. For me it's impossible to read _every_ changelog for minor release changes. For example not so long ago Apache was upgraded from 2.0.54-r15 to 2.0.54-r31. For me as a user/sys.admin based on versionnumbers this is a minor change. However the changes were rather extensive (e.g. reorganization of conf.files). When these changes occur I want to be informed _before_ I start emerge and I think that this information should be _pushed_ to users/sys.admins instead of _pulled_ from external sources (forums, website, mailinglist, etc. or changelogs). If changelogs could be extended with a priority flag and emerge would notify me when a high priority changelog is applicable to my system then this would be just fine for me. Basically all I want is; Notification that new relevant news items will be displayed via the ``emerge`` tool in a similar way to the existing configuration files need updating messages: :: * Important: 3 config files in /etc need updating. * Type emerge --help config to learn how to update config files. * Important: there are 2 security advisories released for installed packages. * Type emerge --security to see the details. * Important: there are 5 unread news items. * Type emerge --help news to learn how to read news files. If this is possible by extending the changelog I'm a happy users/sys.admin. I don't care if I need to type emerge --news or emerge --changelog as long the information is pushed. Disclaimer; I'm not 100% sure that the versionnumbers from Apache mentioned above are exact the real world examples, but you get the idea. Regards, -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 42 (Was: Getting Important Updates To Users)
On Friday 04 November 2005 03:10, Nathan L. Adams wrote: Stuart Herbert wrote: On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 14:51 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote: Did you specifically ask them if it is because we have different news in different locations? Somehow I think you're obscuring some facts to make your own argument. That seems an unpleasant accusation to make :( The answer is that I didn't ask them if it was because we have different news in different locations. The question didn't occur to me. The only problem that we have now with our multiple mediums is that not all news is on all mediums. We should have the same information going to all of these and let the user choose which method they like for getting news. The critical difference between improving our existing mediums, and the emerge --news approach that I've proposed, is that emerge --news is the only approach that actively pushes news out to *all* users, and puts it in a place that is as guaranteed as anything else available to catch their attention. All the other approaches rely on the user going somewhere to get news, whether it's signing up to a mailing list, reading www.g.o, reading the forums, or whatever. Inevitably, this is only going to reach a smaller subsection of our user community. What I care about is that we've taken the right steps to put important information in front of *all* of our users (and our devs!). Even (especially?) the ones who are unable to keep up with the news as it is currently delivered. Making sure our users are well-informed improves the level and quality of service that we provide; it can only enhance our reputation; and it should also cut down on the amount of developer time that goes into post-upgrade support (leaving more time for package maintenance). One source: http://errata.gentoo.org/ Push that out to as many alternate sources as you like (RSS feeds, summaries in emerge --news, forums post, etc.), but make it known that the website is *the* source (your alternate sources should point back to it). Well I don't like web so much for this kind of things, so fails me. I want the info where I need it. I don't have network access from all the machines I admin. So the best possible repository for the news is with the tree, because that is allways required. And because Gentoo has the control over the tree it is very trivial and secure way to spread the news. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 42 (Was: Getting Important Updates To Users)
Nathan L. Adams wrote: One source: http://errata.gentoo.org/ Push that out to as many alternate sources as you like (RSS feeds, summaries in emerge --news, forums post, etc.), but make it known that the website is *the* source (your alternate sources should point back to it). I beg to differ. The tree should be the central point because it's the only known place where all users can receive relevant information on and for each and every system they maintain right before they upgrade. The warning and the logic that triggers its display should be part of Portage. Sometimes, all that would need to be displayed is run foo to fix bar or Please do read http://bleh _before_ you upgrade foo. If an Upgrade guide to foo/bar for Gentoo is required, you need an author to write it, not extra code or an extra web site. -- / Xavier Neys \_ Gentoo Documentation Project / French Internationalisation Lead \ http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en /\ -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 42 (Was: Getting Important Updates To Users)
On Friday 04 November 2005 23:26, Xavier Neys wrote: Nathan L. Adams wrote: One source: http://errata.gentoo.org/ Push that out to as many alternate sources as you like (RSS feeds, summaries in emerge --news, forums post, etc.), but make it known that the website is *the* source (your alternate sources should point back to it). I beg to differ. The tree should be the central point because it's the only known place where all users can receive relevant information on and for each and every system they maintain right before they upgrade. The warning and the logic that triggers its display should be part of Portage. Sometimes, all that would need to be displayed is run foo to fix bar or Please do read http://bleh _before_ you upgrade foo. If an Upgrade guide to foo/bar for Gentoo is required, you need an author to write it, not extra code or an extra web site. I probably shouldn't have included the sarcastic comment in my only other reply to this thread, but the rest of it was completely serious. People are under the mistaken impression that the ebuild tree is required to use portage. This is wrong and will become more and more wrong as time goes by. If there is not a specific need for this news stuff to go into the tree then it shouldn't be there. If there is a specific need (ie. it is tied to packages) what difference is there to the existing ChangeLog? -- Jason Stubbs -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 42 (Was: Getting Important Updates To Users)
Jason Stubbs wrote: On Friday 04 November 2005 23:26, Xavier Neys wrote: Nathan L. Adams wrote: One source: http://errata.gentoo.org/ Push that out to as many alternate sources as you like (RSS feeds, summaries in emerge --news, forums post, etc.), but make it known that the website is *the* source (your alternate sources should point back to it). I beg to differ. The tree should be the central point because it's the only known place where all users can receive relevant information on and for each and every system they maintain right before they upgrade. The warning and the logic that triggers its display should be part of Portage. Sometimes, all that would need to be displayed is run foo to fix bar or Please do read http://bleh _before_ you upgrade foo. If an Upgrade guide to foo/bar for Gentoo is required, you need an author to write it, not extra code or an extra web site. I probably shouldn't have included the sarcastic comment in my only other reply to this thread, but the rest of it was completely serious. People are under the mistaken impression that the ebuild tree is required to use portage. This is wrong and will become more and more wrong as time goes by. If there is not a specific need for this news stuff to go into the tree then it shouldn't be there. If there is a specific need (ie. it is tied to packages) what difference is there to the existing ChangeLog? -- Jason Stubbs I am going to summarize a bit, and address your point. Summary: people want small news tidbits to be distributed to all users. Currently the suggestion is tree-based. Portage should have code to detect news elements after a sync and copy relevant elements to a uesr specified news directory. The news should be in a human readable format (XML, RST, pig latin, don't care at this point see below). Portage should post-sync, print a message noting the number of unread but relevant news messages. Users can use whatever means of reading them that they like. IMHO, emerge --news can go to hell in a handbasket, I'd rather just friggin use less, but hey, if you write the code... News messages should contain minimal information necessary to carry relevant information including affected packages, and a link to some sort of documentation, be it gentoo-wiki, or official package docs, or whatever. For those without internet access 24/7, there may be an option required to fetch these links. In the case of say, dial-up where someone only has network say, 4 hours a day, they may wish to sync their tree, and spider the docs links so they may view them locally. Machines with no outside network ( internal production servers ) may also wish to make use of this. In the case of online guides, we cannot necessarily define their content, it may be XML, it may be plain text. I do not see how conceeding that a user may need a web browser SOMEWHERE, is that big of a tradeoff, especially if the content is already locally available. As far as including news in the tree goes, news is repository bound information. Each repository may in fact have relevant news, and in preparation for multiple repositories this is how the news should be handled. It goes with the rest of the repo-specific information. That is why it should be in the tree. However, in the case of a remote tree, some extra API calls may be required. However, it is up to the class implementor to implement those calls, not the original portage team ( unless you want to support remote trees yourself, in which case that duty falls to you ). The only other thing was no tree but a binpkg repo, in which case in savior, binpkg repo should have news elements build in ( a repo, just all built packages ). In stable, news should probably be added to the binpackage if it's listed in the packages-affected. For the XML vs RST. I personally don't want to read XML files in a console, or install anything that makes it look all pretty for me, RST is plenty good enough. Since Ciaran has graciously written all the code for it already, I don't see any reason not to use it. RST is pretty simple to migrate to a new format anyhow, and a converter could be easily whipped up to transform it to guideXMl for errate.g.o if that is what is desired ( not a bad idea IMHO ). I forgot one other thing, that being perhaps a red NEWS that shows up next to affected packages during an emerge -pv package, informing you that important news is available for a package you are about to install. So yeah, this is a long thread :0 Alec Warner (Antarus) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 42 (Was: Getting Important Updates To Users)
Jason Stubbs wrote: On Saturday 05 November 2005 03:53, Alec Joseph Warner wrote: As far as including news in the tree goes, news is repository bound information. Each repository may in fact have relevant news, and in preparation for multiple repositories this is how the news should be handled. It goes with the rest of the repo-specific information. That is why it should be in the tree. I seem to be repeating myself... What's an example of repository-specific non-package-specific news? Why does `emerge --changelog` not suffice for package-specific news? -- Jason Stubbs Ok so I'm pwned there ;) emerge --changelog has no 'official' format. I believe echangelog actually puts the changes in the correct format for emerge -l to read, however not everyone uses echangelog. Many developers commit in an incompatable syntax causing the parsing to fail. This I believe, is an implementation issue. Obviously if someone is trying to get an upgrade guide to users they aren't going to commit in an incompatable format. We had a similar discussion before and many people wanted gentoo changelogs to stay true to only gentoo changes, thus some think a gentoo changelog is an inappropriate place to look for upgrade guides and errata. Changelogs are also not easy to search through and the current syntax does not provide all the benifits of the syntax provided by GLEP 42. So the options for using emerge --changelog are basically, updating the syntax to make it useful, probably audit the changelog code in emerge to make sure it works better ( even half decent 'entries' aren't grabbed, but I haven't looked at the changelog code in months ). This of course makes emerge the newsreader you didn't want, although I'm sure the eselect module could be modified to read Changelog's just as easily. Also, nothing covers the expiration of Changelog contents vs expiration of news items, since the news items are file independent, what if a bunch of commits basically erases a relevant news item out of the changelog? Certainly I would support either way ( news or changelog ) although in the latter case there are some seperate issues that need to be worked out ( mostly policy issues ). -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 42 (Was: Getting Important Updates To Users)
On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 14:51 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote: Did you specifically ask them if it is because we have different news in different locations? Somehow I think you're obscuring some facts to make your own argument. That seems an unpleasant accusation to make :( The answer is that I didn't ask them if it was because we have different news in different locations. The question didn't occur to me. The only problem that we have now with our multiple mediums is that not all news is on all mediums. We should have the same information going to all of these and let the user choose which method they like for getting news. The critical difference between improving our existing mediums, and the emerge --news approach that I've proposed, is that emerge --news is the only approach that actively pushes news out to *all* users, and puts it in a place that is as guaranteed as anything else available to catch their attention. All the other approaches rely on the user going somewhere to get news, whether it's signing up to a mailing list, reading www.g.o, reading the forums, or whatever. Inevitably, this is only going to reach a smaller subsection of our user community. What I care about is that we've taken the right steps to put important information in front of *all* of our users (and our devs!). Even (especially?) the ones who are unable to keep up with the news as it is currently delivered. Making sure our users are well-informed improves the level and quality of service that we provide; it can only enhance our reputation; and it should also cut down on the amount of developer time that goes into post-upgrade support (leaving more time for package maintenance). Best regards, Stu -- Stuart Herbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo Developer http://www.gentoo.org/ http://stu.gnqs.org/diary/ GnuGP key id# F9AFC57C available from http://pgp.mit.edu Key fingerprint = 31FB 50D4 1F88 E227 F319 C549 0C2F 80BA F9AF C57C -- signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 42 (Was: Getting Important Updates To Users)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Stuart Herbert wrote: On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 14:51 -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote: Did you specifically ask them if it is because we have different news in different locations? Somehow I think you're obscuring some facts to make your own argument. That seems an unpleasant accusation to make :( The answer is that I didn't ask them if it was because we have different news in different locations. The question didn't occur to me. The only problem that we have now with our multiple mediums is that not all news is on all mediums. We should have the same information going to all of these and let the user choose which method they like for getting news. The critical difference between improving our existing mediums, and the emerge --news approach that I've proposed, is that emerge --news is the only approach that actively pushes news out to *all* users, and puts it in a place that is as guaranteed as anything else available to catch their attention. All the other approaches rely on the user going somewhere to get news, whether it's signing up to a mailing list, reading www.g.o, reading the forums, or whatever. Inevitably, this is only going to reach a smaller subsection of our user community. What I care about is that we've taken the right steps to put important information in front of *all* of our users (and our devs!). Even (especially?) the ones who are unable to keep up with the news as it is currently delivered. Making sure our users are well-informed improves the level and quality of service that we provide; it can only enhance our reputation; and it should also cut down on the amount of developer time that goes into post-upgrade support (leaving more time for package maintenance). One source: http://errata.gentoo.org/ Push that out to as many alternate sources as you like (RSS feeds, summaries in emerge --news, forums post, etc.), but make it known that the website is *the* source (your alternate sources should point back to it). -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDarUL2QTTR4CNEQARAh0pAKCi7BJpBOkRRT4iiaXUjajwbrjseACfahPV R2MVvKhkLfnid1/ADRUZAxk= =Oou4 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 42 (Was: Getting Important Updates To Users)
On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 08:56 +0100, Wernfried Haas wrote: On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 06:52:04PM -0500, Dan Meltzer wrote: 1) Why post to forums.g.o if its on www, why would one check forums instead of www. Redundancy - to get the attention of those folks that for whatever reason visit the forums and not www.gentoo.org in a specific time interval. The more places you cover, the more likely people will see it somewhere. We've been doing that with GLSAs for quite a while now. Exactly. While I agree that we need a single source where users can get their information, I feel that the *user* should be able to choose their source. If that is the gentoo-announce mailing list, or www.gentoo.org, or the forums, it doesn't matter. The same information should be duplicated. Make them *all* a definitive source. We don't need to check all of them if any one of them gives all of the information needed. As for subscriber counts or whatever, if by adding the information to gentoo-announce (or the forums or wherever), we reach 10 more users that we wouldn't have reached before, then I consider it a success. The idea is to reach as many users as possible here. To me, that means duplicating the information everywhere. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 42 (Was: Getting Important Updates To Users)
On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 08:56 +0100, Wernfried Haas wrote: On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 06:52:04PM -0500, Dan Meltzer wrote: 1) Why post to forums.g.o if its on www, why would one check forums instead of www. Redundancy - to get the attention of those folks that for whatever reason visit the forums and not www.gentoo.org in a specific time interval. The more places you cover, the more likely people will see it somewhere. We've been doing that with GLSAs for quite a while now. The users I've spoken to about our news situation have expressly stated that one of their concerns is that there are *too many* places to check for news. They're not looking for us to scatter news across many mediums - they want one place to go. Best regards, Stu -- Stuart Herbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo Developer http://www.gentoo.org/ http://stu.gnqs.org/diary/ GnuGP key id# F9AFC57C available from http://pgp.mit.edu Key fingerprint = 31FB 50D4 1F88 E227 F319 C549 0C2F 80BA F9AF C57C -- signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 42 (Was: Getting Important Updates To Users)
On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 19:32 +, Stuart Herbert wrote: On Tue, 2005-11-01 at 08:56 +0100, Wernfried Haas wrote: On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 06:52:04PM -0500, Dan Meltzer wrote: 1) Why post to forums.g.o if its on www, why would one check forums instead of www. Redundancy - to get the attention of those folks that for whatever reason visit the forums and not www.gentoo.org in a specific time interval. The more places you cover, the more likely people will see it somewhere. We've been doing that with GLSAs for quite a while now. The users I've spoken to about our news situation have expressly stated that one of their concerns is that there are *too many* places to check for news. Did you specifically ask them if it is because we have different news in different locations? Somehow I think you're obscuring some facts to make your own argument. Allow me to make this one. If I want to get all of my facts from gentoo-announce, do I give a damn if the same thing is *also* posted on www.gentoo.org for others to read? Does it somehow inhibit my ability to get all of the news from gentoo-announce? They're not looking for us to scatter news across many mediums - they want one place to go. The only problem that we have now with our multiple mediums is that not all news is on all mediums. We should have the same information going to all of these and let the user choose which method they like for getting news. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 42 (Was: Getting Important Updates To Users)
On Tuesday 01 November 2005 19:32, Stuart Herbert wrote: 1) Why post to forums.g.o if its on www, why would one check forums instead of www. Redundancy - to get the attention of those folks that for whatever The users I've spoken to about our news situation have expressly stated that one of their concerns is that there are *too many* places to check for news. They're not looking for us to scatter news across many mediums - they want one place to go. This user would prefer important news in as many places as possible. Yes, scattering different types of news about the tree in different places is stupid, having the same news in 4 different places might be mildly annoying if you see it 4 times, but if 4 times as many users see it all the better. Redundancy is a Good Thing. -- Mike Williams -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 42 (Was: Getting Important Updates To Users)
On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 06:52:04PM -0500, Dan Meltzer wrote: 1) Why post to forums.g.o if its on www, why would one check forums instead of www. Redundancy - to get the attention of those folks that for whatever reason visit the forums and not www.gentoo.org in a specific time interval. The more places you cover, the more likely people will see it somewhere. We've been doing that with GLSAs for quite a while now. cheers, Wernfried -- Wernfried Haas (amne) - amne at gentoo dot org Gentoo Forums: http://forums.gentoo.org IRC: #gentoo-forums on freenode - email: forum-mods at gentoo dot org -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
