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

Re: Done

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 12:51:03 +0100, Oliver Elphick <olly@lfix.co.uk> said: 

> On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 07:24, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 14:53:53 -0500, Steve Langasek
>> <vorlon@netexpress.net> said:
>> > If you are able to recognize that a given package description is
>> > inadequate, you are also capable of discerning *what* is wrong
>> > with it, even if you don't know what the package does; and you
>> > are
>> Umm.
>> Package: blacs-lam-test Description: Basic Linear Algebra
>> Communications Subprograms This package provides programs to test
>> your BLACS libraries.
>> Let us see. Whats is a Basic Linear Algebra Communications
>> Subprogram? What kind of tests are provided? Why should I want to
>> install this package?

> Why indeed?  I put myself in the position of a "normal" user:

> Basic Linear Algebra ???

> Algebra means maths I don't need any maths programs I don't need
> this package

	In other words, your assumption is
 a) most users would be scared off by math (mildly insulting, I
 b) the users of this package are intelligent and do not require a
    useful description

>> I recognize this desciption is inadequate, mostly because I have no
>> idea what the package in question does.  What are Linear Algebra
>> Communications?  Are there communications programs, as opposed to
>> subprograms? Heck, I don't even know enough to ask intelligent
>> questions.

> As a "normal" user, I know that I don't need to ask any questions.
> I don't need this package or any others related to it.  Only
> mathematicians or scientists are likely to need it and they will
> know what Linear Algebra is.

 c) normal users are users like me, and I do not need to cater to
    people not like me.

> Now if that conclusion is erroneous, then the package description is
> indeed inadequate; but I believe the conclusion to be correct.

	Ah yes. Debian users are either smart and know all they need
 to know about my packages, or the package is not for them. Talk about
 elitism and novice hostility.

> A second point in relation to this particular package is that it
> would not be considered on its own.  At packages.debian.org, it is
> shown to be dependent on blacs1-lam, which says something about what
> BLACS is.  Why clutter the database with duplicate explanations?
> The Packages.gz file is already enormous.

	Should also say so in the description, then.  

> Thirdly, the package is a test package.  Why would any user even
> think of installing a test package unless he already knows he wants
> the package that is to be tested?

 d) this package should not be used by most people, but I'll give no
    such indication to them while selecting package.

	Umm, how do I know it is a test package? Why does the
 description not warn me?  I am a user. There are a lot of packages I
 do not know about. I install packages from time to time on my Big
 machine at home, t play around with.

	However, this very line of reasoning smacks of arrogance. And
 it is novice unfriendly -- you are assuming the only people looking
 at the description, or who have a desire to install it, are all
 knowledgeable users , and, therefore, I can be lazy and not provide
 useful information in the description

	How about people like me, who have a background in math, but
 are no longer practicing, who are not familiar with modern math
 tools, but are interested in math still? What are we, chopped liver?

Linus?  Whose that? clueless newbie on #Linux
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: