[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Done

On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 04:59:07PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava scribbled:
> >> You realize, of course, that while you responded you Jaldhar, you
> >> have disagreed with Santiago Vila, and now it's down to a matter of
> >> honor.
> > Why should you chose m4-doc over its competition? Because it
> > documents m4 in HTML format a lot better than any other package, of
> > course ;-)
> > The questions posed by Manoj might be legitimate (or not) for
> > usermin-mysql, but in some cases they do not make any sense at all.
> 	I am sorry. I had not meant my reply to preclude the
>  maintainers from thinking. The basic principles behind my questions
>  are valid:
>   a) What does this package do?
>   b) Why should I install it? Do I even need to install it, or would
>      it be pulled in by dependency relationships?
>   c) How is this package different from others of its kind? Are there
>      others of its kind? What are the strengths? The missing features? 
> 	As always, common sense is a triat that a maintainer can
>  rarely do without. 
I think the questions you listed above are very valid, but the bug submitter
should have asked himself those very questions, too. If he did that and
answered them all, I bet that he would have filed less than half of the bugs
he had. I will take my packages for example. Most of them were Pike
extension packages, which are all pulled (or can be pulled) as pike
extensions - most of them recommended or suggested by other pike packages.
In that aspect, their description was sufficient. I have extended the
descriptions for just for the record and the only thing that annoys me in
all this situation is that the bug submitter threw all the job on the
maintainers' shoulders without doing _any_ useful work himself. Pointing
fingers is not considered to be helpful.



Attachment: pgp4paFnzg8lm.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: