You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@wicket.apache.org by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> on 2008/05/01 21:01:46 UTC
Re: RTFM messages
On 5/1/08, Andrew Broderick <ab...@peak6solutions.com> wrote:
> The guy asked a simple question.
And I answered it is a simple manner: read the javadoc, if that
doesn't help you, tell us what is wrong. All condensed in a single
question. You chose to read it as a RTFM. Did you ever read [1]?
> If there's one fault with this otherwise great mailing list, it's the attitude that
> the old-timers have towards the newbies.
WTF? Why is it so hard to actually use the stuff we have provided? We
write javadoc, we have a wiki, we are writing a book, spend a lot of
our free time working on wicket related stuff, including answering
questions on this list. There is no payment for us in all of this (if
you think that the book will bring us money, then write your own and
see if it works out for you)
Is it then too much to ask that people actually read the javadoc and
if you don't understand the javadoc, *THEN* ask the question related
to the javadoc?
> So, guys, if you want Wicket to attain widespread adoption, please don't shoot
> back at anyone who asks a question with a response of RTFM. Take the time
> to explain stuff.
users@ had 2186 messages in April, 37% of that traffic came from 10
people. 4 of them were so-called old-timers, not asking questions but
helping out. >25% of traffic in April came from core contributors. So
please don't tell me we are not helping out.
What do you think the javadoc is for? Do you think we write javadoc to
increase our commit count? Didn't we already put in the time to
explain it? Did you consider that the ratio of users asking questions
that they can answer themselves versus the contributors that actually
answer is roughly 30 : 1, putting us (the old-timers) at a serious
disadvantage?
> (This also contributes to the Wicket knowledge base, as it
> remains in the list archives, and hence shows up in Google searches).
Why do you think we write the javadocs? So people can READ them. When
people don't take the time to actually read the fricking javadoc, what
does make you think that people will use google, the wiki or the
mailing list archive?
Martijn
[1] http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: RTFM messages
Posted by Jonathan Locke <jo...@gmail.com>.
i am quite amazed by the quality of help people get on wicket-user and
##wicket. most highly paid service contracts don't give this level of
service.
Martijn Dashorst wrote:
>
> On 5/1/08, Andrew Broderick <ab...@peak6solutions.com> wrote:
>> The guy asked a simple question.
>
> And I answered it is a simple manner: read the javadoc, if that
> doesn't help you, tell us what is wrong. All condensed in a single
> question. You chose to read it as a RTFM. Did you ever read [1]?
>
>> If there's one fault with this otherwise great mailing list, it's the
>> attitude that
>> the old-timers have towards the newbies.
>
> WTF? Why is it so hard to actually use the stuff we have provided? We
> write javadoc, we have a wiki, we are writing a book, spend a lot of
> our free time working on wicket related stuff, including answering
> questions on this list. There is no payment for us in all of this (if
> you think that the book will bring us money, then write your own and
> see if it works out for you)
>
> Is it then too much to ask that people actually read the javadoc and
> if you don't understand the javadoc, *THEN* ask the question related
> to the javadoc?
>
>> So, guys, if you want Wicket to attain widespread adoption, please don't
>> shoot
>> back at anyone who asks a question with a response of RTFM. Take the time
>> to explain stuff.
>
> users@ had 2186 messages in April, 37% of that traffic came from 10
> people. 4 of them were so-called old-timers, not asking questions but
> helping out. >25% of traffic in April came from core contributors. So
> please don't tell me we are not helping out.
>
> What do you think the javadoc is for? Do you think we write javadoc to
> increase our commit count? Didn't we already put in the time to
> explain it? Did you consider that the ratio of users asking questions
> that they can answer themselves versus the contributors that actually
> answer is roughly 30 : 1, putting us (the old-timers) at a serious
> disadvantage?
>
>> (This also contributes to the Wicket knowledge base, as it
>> remains in the list archives, and hence shows up in Google searches).
>
> Why do you think we write the javadocs? So people can READ them. When
> people don't take the time to actually read the fricking javadoc, what
> does make you think that people will use google, the wiki or the
> mailing list archive?
>
> Martijn
>
> [1] http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-RTFM-messages-tp17007353p17025623.html
Sent from the Wicket - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: RTFM messages
Posted by Robby O'Connor <ro...@gmail.com>.
+1
Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> On 5/1/08, Andrew Broderick <ab...@peak6solutions.com> wrote:
>> The guy asked a simple question.
>
> And I answered it is a simple manner: read the javadoc, if that
> doesn't help you, tell us what is wrong. All condensed in a single
> question. You chose to read it as a RTFM. Did you ever read [1]?
>
>> If there's one fault with this otherwise great mailing list, it's the attitude that
>> the old-timers have towards the newbies.
>
> WTF? Why is it so hard to actually use the stuff we have provided? We
> write javadoc, we have a wiki, we are writing a book, spend a lot of
> our free time working on wicket related stuff, including answering
> questions on this list. There is no payment for us in all of this (if
> you think that the book will bring us money, then write your own and
> see if it works out for you)
>
> Is it then too much to ask that people actually read the javadoc and
> if you don't understand the javadoc, *THEN* ask the question related
> to the javadoc?
>
>> So, guys, if you want Wicket to attain widespread adoption, please don't shoot
>> back at anyone who asks a question with a response of RTFM. Take the time
>> to explain stuff.
>
> users@ had 2186 messages in April, 37% of that traffic came from 10
> people. 4 of them were so-called old-timers, not asking questions but
> helping out. >25% of traffic in April came from core contributors. So
> please don't tell me we are not helping out.
>
> What do you think the javadoc is for? Do you think we write javadoc to
> increase our commit count? Didn't we already put in the time to
> explain it? Did you consider that the ratio of users asking questions
> that they can answer themselves versus the contributors that actually
> answer is roughly 30 : 1, putting us (the old-timers) at a serious
> disadvantage?
>
>> (This also contributes to the Wicket knowledge base, as it
>> remains in the list archives, and hence shows up in Google searches).
>
> Why do you think we write the javadocs? So people can READ them. When
> people don't take the time to actually read the fricking javadoc, what
> does make you think that people will use google, the wiki or the
> mailing list archive?
>
> Martijn
>
> [1] http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: RTFM messages
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
On 5/1/08, C. Bergström <cb...@netsyncro.com> wrote:
> Tact sold separately
ROFLMAO
Martijn
--
Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst
Apache Wicket 1.3.3 is released
Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.3
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
RE: RTFM messages
Posted by Andrew Broderick <ab...@peak6solutions.com>.
Maybe that is the problem - 10% of the people give 90% of the answers. This means they have less time to explain stuff in detail. However, you are right - the answers are fast (within minutes) and, even if not complete, usually give enough information to find the right place to dig.
I do in fact search all the sources I can find before asking the list, including: wicketstuff.org, Google (Nabble has excellent Wicket stuff), the list archives, and Wicket In Action.
As for explaining it to new users myself, I would if I knew the answer! I am still a newbie, although if I have anything to say about it, we will be using Wicket for a long time to come, so I will eventually become expert at it. The code is of extremely high quality, and one taste of using it is enough to make me never want to touch another front-end framework again. Good work all.
-Andrew
-----Original Message-----
From: jeremythomerson@gmail.com [mailto:jeremythomerson@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy Thomerson
Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 2:26 PM
To: users@wicket.apache.org
Subject: Re: RTFM messages
I have to add here that I have asked quite a few questions on this list, and
always received a plethora of helpful information - 90% of the time from
core contributors. This list is the best open source mailing list I have
ever subscribed to or asked questions on. Many times I have sent emails to
other user lists, even active ones, with questions I could not find the
answer to, and never received a response - at all.
The entire Wicket community is very friendly and helpful. And, honestly, if
I asked a question for which there were an answer in the javadoc - I would
appreciate Martijn's answer - it would remind me to look for it myself
(which we sometimes get so busy we forget) - and it has much better longterm
benefit than giving a direct answer, or even copy-and-paste the javadoc.
Of course, Andrew, you always have the option of explaining it to the new
user, too - that might help with the wide spread adoption. I see from your
message history that you love Wicket like the rest of it, and have received
many fine answers from the same core committers that you criticize here.
Just saying - it goes both ways.
THANK YOU WONDERFUL WICKET COMMUNITY AND ESPECIALLY THE CORE COMMITTERS
(Igor, Martijn, Johan, and everyone)!!!!
My 2 cents....
On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 2:13 PM, C. Bergström <cb...@netsyncro.com>
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 21:01 +0200, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> > On 5/1/08, Andrew Broderick <ab...@peak6solutions.com> wrote:
> > > The guy asked a simple question.
> >
> > And I answered it is a simple manner: read the javadoc, if that
> > doesn't help you, tell us what is wrong. All condensed in a single
> > question. You chose to read it as a RTFM. Did you ever read [1]?
> >
>
> <commentary>
> I've worked with Martijn a bit and overall I really appreciate his
> concise and clear answers. On first read of his post you can surely
> feel a defensive tone, but really this is more an example of how
> passionate Wicket devs are about quality not only in code but
> documentation.
>
> Tact sold separately
> </commentary>
>
> ./C
>
> >
> > [1] http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html<http://www.catb.org/%7Eesr/faqs/smart-questions.html>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
_______________________________________________________
The information in this email or in any file attached
hereto is intended only for the personal and confiden-
tial use of the individual or entity to which it is
addressed and may contain information that is propri-
etary and confidential. If you are not the intended
recipient of this message you are hereby notified that
any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of
this message is strictly prohibited. This communica-
tion is for information purposes only and should not
be regarded as an offer to sell or as a solicitation
of an offer to buy any financial product. Email trans-
mission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-
free. P6070214
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: RTFM messages
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
On 5/1/08, Jeremy Thomerson <je...@thomersonfamily.com> wrote:
> THANK YOU WONDERFUL WICKET COMMUNITY AND ESPECIALLY
> THE CORE COMMITTERS
thx, I appreciate it.
However, this is not what I'm personally after. I enjoy positive
feedback like the next guy, but I really like it when people respect
my time and effort. This means doing some homework yourself before
asking questions: search the archives, read the wiki, use google,
read the javadoc, set some break points and step through the code.
Attach the sources of wicket to your workspace so you can take a look
under the hood and see what is happening there (mvn eclipse:eclipse
-DdownloadSources=true).
You get a wonderful framework for free, you get pretty much unlimited
support for free, all we ask is that you invest time and effort before
asking questions on the lists. That's all.
Thank you all for choosing Wicket and helping out in the community.
Martijn
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: RTFM messages
Posted by Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com>.
yeah! reading code!
thats also my philosophy:
"Doc lies, code doesn't"
johan
On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 10:17 PM, Matthew Young <gi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just want to add my appreciation to all the help I got here, especially
> from
> Igor. Sometime I receive the answer instantly, even on weekend! One
> thing
> I learn to do is not only read the javadoc but read the code. A lot of
> the
> component stuffs are pretty easy to follow, especially if you use
> something
> like Eclipse's Java Browsing. Go Wicket!
>
Re: RTFM messages
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
you are welcome
-igor
On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 1:17 PM, Matthew Young <gi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just want to add my appreciation to all the help I got here, especially from
> Igor. Sometime I receive the answer instantly, even on weekend! One thing
> I learn to do is not only read the javadoc but read the code. A lot of the
> component stuffs are pretty easy to follow, especially if you use something
> like Eclipse's Java Browsing. Go Wicket!
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: RTFM messages
Posted by Matthew Young <gi...@gmail.com>.
Just want to add my appreciation to all the help I got here, especially from
Igor. Sometime I receive the answer instantly, even on weekend! One thing
I learn to do is not only read the javadoc but read the code. A lot of the
component stuffs are pretty easy to follow, especially if you use something
like Eclipse's Java Browsing. Go Wicket!
Re: RTFM messages
Posted by Robby O'Connor <ro...@gmail.com>.
+1
Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
> I have to add here that I have asked quite a few questions on this list, and
> always received a plethora of helpful information - 90% of the time from
> core contributors. This list is the best open source mailing list I have
> ever subscribed to or asked questions on. Many times I have sent emails to
> other user lists, even active ones, with questions I could not find the
> answer to, and never received a response - at all.
>
> The entire Wicket community is very friendly and helpful. And, honestly, if
> I asked a question for which there were an answer in the javadoc - I would
> appreciate Martijn's answer - it would remind me to look for it myself
> (which we sometimes get so busy we forget) - and it has much better longterm
> benefit than giving a direct answer, or even copy-and-paste the javadoc.
>
> Of course, Andrew, you always have the option of explaining it to the new
> user, too - that might help with the wide spread adoption. I see from your
> message history that you love Wicket like the rest of it, and have received
> many fine answers from the same core committers that you criticize here.
> Just saying - it goes both ways.
>
> THANK YOU WONDERFUL WICKET COMMUNITY AND ESPECIALLY THE CORE COMMITTERS
> (Igor, Martijn, Johan, and everyone)!!!!
>
> My 2 cents....
>
> On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 2:13 PM, C. Bergström <cb...@netsyncro.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 21:01 +0200, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
>>> On 5/1/08, Andrew Broderick <ab...@peak6solutions.com> wrote:
>>>> The guy asked a simple question.
>>> And I answered it is a simple manner: read the javadoc, if that
>>> doesn't help you, tell us what is wrong. All condensed in a single
>>> question. You chose to read it as a RTFM. Did you ever read [1]?
>>>
>> <commentary>
>> I've worked with Martijn a bit and overall I really appreciate his
>> concise and clear answers. On first read of his post you can surely
>> feel a defensive tone, but really this is more an example of how
>> passionate Wicket devs are about quality not only in code but
>> documentation.
>>
>> Tact sold separately
>> </commentary>
>>
>> ./C
>>
>>> [1] http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html<http://www.catb.org/%7Eesr/faqs/smart-questions.html>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>>
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
Re: RTFM messages
Posted by Jeremy Thomerson <je...@thomersonfamily.com>.
I have to add here that I have asked quite a few questions on this list, and
always received a plethora of helpful information - 90% of the time from
core contributors. This list is the best open source mailing list I have
ever subscribed to or asked questions on. Many times I have sent emails to
other user lists, even active ones, with questions I could not find the
answer to, and never received a response - at all.
The entire Wicket community is very friendly and helpful. And, honestly, if
I asked a question for which there were an answer in the javadoc - I would
appreciate Martijn's answer - it would remind me to look for it myself
(which we sometimes get so busy we forget) - and it has much better longterm
benefit than giving a direct answer, or even copy-and-paste the javadoc.
Of course, Andrew, you always have the option of explaining it to the new
user, too - that might help with the wide spread adoption. I see from your
message history that you love Wicket like the rest of it, and have received
many fine answers from the same core committers that you criticize here.
Just saying - it goes both ways.
THANK YOU WONDERFUL WICKET COMMUNITY AND ESPECIALLY THE CORE COMMITTERS
(Igor, Martijn, Johan, and everyone)!!!!
My 2 cents....
On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 2:13 PM, C. Bergström <cb...@netsyncro.com>
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 21:01 +0200, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> > On 5/1/08, Andrew Broderick <ab...@peak6solutions.com> wrote:
> > > The guy asked a simple question.
> >
> > And I answered it is a simple manner: read the javadoc, if that
> > doesn't help you, tell us what is wrong. All condensed in a single
> > question. You chose to read it as a RTFM. Did you ever read [1]?
> >
>
> <commentary>
> I've worked with Martijn a bit and overall I really appreciate his
> concise and clear answers. On first read of his post you can surely
> feel a defensive tone, but really this is more an example of how
> passionate Wicket devs are about quality not only in code but
> documentation.
>
> Tact sold separately
> </commentary>
>
> ./C
>
> >
> > [1] http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html<http://www.catb.org/%7Eesr/faqs/smart-questions.html>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org
>
>
Re: RTFM messages
Posted by "C. Bergström" <cb...@netsyncro.com>.
On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 21:01 +0200, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> On 5/1/08, Andrew Broderick <ab...@peak6solutions.com> wrote:
> > The guy asked a simple question.
>
> And I answered it is a simple manner: read the javadoc, if that
> doesn't help you, tell us what is wrong. All condensed in a single
> question. You chose to read it as a RTFM. Did you ever read [1]?
>
<commentary>
I've worked with Martijn a bit and overall I really appreciate his
concise and clear answers. On first read of his post you can surely
feel a defensive tone, but really this is more an example of how
passionate Wicket devs are about quality not only in code but
documentation.
Tact sold separately
</commentary>
./C
>
> [1] http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@wicket.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@wicket.apache.org