Re: Again about anonymous contributions to DDT*
On 08/12/2011 09:39 AM, Christian PERRIER wrote:
Quoting Michael Bramer (email@example.com):
Sorry, christian, this count for me...
Well, sorry, but it doesn't, for me. I haven't seen an explanation
about why *anonymous* contributions have improved the status for
And I haven't seen any explanation about why they have to be
Commits per IP, without some random names, was the default since
With starting the script, I change the default, that you changed in
If some team (like pl or da) say:
We worked well in the last months, we make a lot of translations, we
don't have problems, please open the door: if not we maybe lost
What Joe told is that:
- the status of Danish improved during recent months
- 22 reviews are waiting for some time
because the 'da' team has today only:
- 126.96.36.199, 188.8.131.52
as users and need 2 reviewers....
If you lost the ip-user, da have a problem.
What I would like to hear, at least to be able to *understand* is why
activating anonymous contributions makes this any better.
because ip-users make the work. They don't make problems, they don't
make spam, ...
Why will you close the door for some random debian user?
Is there someone cooperating on a regular basis who is using the
anonymous way to contribute?
Are there reasons for this person to insist on using anonymous
contributions or is it just because (s)he doesn't know about
Maybe some reason:
- we have a bug in the 'login' process (I don't think so)
- someone don't like cookies
- someone don't like the 1001 useless online account with passwort
- someone like to only translate his 3 packages
you can edit wikipedia pages without a account, you can submit a bug
report in the BTS without a account.
What is the problem, with a contribution as IP-user?
If we habe problems, we can close the door. But we don't have any
problems with IP-Users? Have we?
*All this* is what I want to hear. And I insist on that. I will not
revert the change made to allow anon for Danish, but I will like to get
answers to my questions and I insist strongly on such discussion to
happen before re-activating other anon contribs.
I also insist strongly on having input from the German team about the
status of their anonymous contributor(s).
If I understand the german team in the right way:
- the main work is made from some people (2-4)
- The ip-user don't make problems, but make some work
I check the logs:
- I find IP, who
- fetch a description (64 fetchs from 128 description in progress)
- make a review (7 )
Why should we close the door, if the IP-User don't make problems?