Re: criticism of our changelogs

[David Landgren <da...@landgren.net>]

Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> I'm not sure I disagree technically but I personally always hate criticism
> of open-source/volunteer projects because my view is that a complaint must
> be coupled with an offer to step-up to the plate and fix the problem.

Uh, Andy Lester is not just some random open source leech. He maintains 
many crucial Perl modules, so it's not like he is someone with too much 
time on their hands, nor understands how large projects work.

The Perl core has its own changelog (gated to a mailing list), but 
that's not what goes into the public Changes file (or rather, the 
perl5xxdelta pod file for a release. The Changes file is written up by 
the current pumpking, and then sent to the p5p mailing for comments, 
corrections and additions. It takes about two to three weeks to get it 
right.

I'm not saying SA should take (or need) as long, but the underlying 
argument is quite valid: what's changed, and should I upgrade. It needs 
to be a document written by a human, for humans.

> Invite him to join the project and help with documentation if he feels that
> strongly.

Uh, no, I don't think so. You know the internals, he doesn't.

David

> Regards,
> KAM
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Justin Mason" <jm...@jmason.org>
> To: <de...@spamassassin.apache.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 4:54 PM
> Subject: criticism of our changelogs
> 
> 
>> http://use.perl.org/~petdance/journal/30809
>>
>> fyi...
>>
>> --j.
>>
> 


-- 
hope still, a little resistance always maybe stubborn tiny lights vs. 
clustering darkness forever ok? -- g!ybe

Re: criticism of our changelogs

[OpenMacNews <op...@gmail.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

>> a complaint must
>> be coupled with an offer to step-up to the plate and fix the problem.

so, just not-so-rhetorically curious ... what, then, would be the mechanism for 
users -- who aren't prepared/interested/qualified to make changes -- to voice a 
legitimate criticism?

the implication, to my read, is that opinions on F/OSS projects are 'only' to 
be voiced by developers that contribute code, no?

> I'm not saying SA should take (or need) as long, but the underlying argument
> is quite valid: what's changed, and should I upgrade. It needs to be a
> document written by a human, for humans.

hear, hear!

personally, i'd also add that such 'objective' voices, whether regularly 
involved in a project or not, often shine light on issues that have been 
overlooked -- if only due to the inevitable myopia from being deeply involved 
in a project.

AND, i'm glad to see the folks here generally being very accepting of such 
opinions.

as always, my $0.02.

cheers,

richard


- -- 

/"\
\ /  ASCII Ribbon Campaign
 X   against HTML email, vCards
/ \  & micro$oft attachments

[GPG] OpenMacNews at gmail dot com
fingerprint: 50C9 1C46 2F8F DE42 2EDB  D460 95F7 DDBD 3671 08C6
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAkT7CXQACgkQlffdvTZxCMaWTACeNvfE8ft2PaCTAW+X6WvMJnjg
sl0AoMk6qCho//19JWQT+/hwCe+J1w3E
=2ZI9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----