On Sat, 5 May 2007 16:05:08 +0200 "Wulf C. Krueger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Saturday, May 5, 2007 03:23:41 PM Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > [Paludis configuration: * -> */*] > > Experience and user feedback has shown that in situations like this > > users want an accompanying news item even if the application does > > output deprecation warnings. > > Currently, there are two news item in the Paludis overlay. Unless > earlier ones were removed, those two seem to be a fairly small sample > to deduce anything from.
They were. > Furthermore, GLEP42 states: > > "News items must only be for important changes that may cause serious > upgrade or compatibility problems. Ordinary upgrade messages and > non-critical news items should remain in einfo notices." > > 2007-05-04-paludis-0.24 doesn't fit this description. That isn't the > real problem, though. This is sufficiently important to Paludis users that Paludis users should see a news item for it. > The real problem with issuing news items for trivial changes is that > people will just start marking such news items read without really > reading them or even stop synching news items completely. This is not a trivial change. > Then, elog and friends would be fully sufficient for informing users > about such configuration changes - under the circumstances of this > case at least. We already know from similar cases that this isn't true. -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
