On Saturday, May 5, 2007 04:14:25 PM Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > 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.
How many news items did you issue? (It's probably easier for you to say instead of me searching the entire history of the overlay. :-) ) > > 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." [...] > This is sufficiently important to Paludis users that Paludis users > should see a news item for it. Which are those "serious upgrade or compatibility problems" you're trying to avoid? Paludis warned about the change at runtime only. For "serious problems" I'm sure you'd make it error out, wouldn't you? > > 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. (Could you please try to argument instead of just making statements?) The old configuration format still works. Thus, from a user's point of view, it is a trivial change. I agree with you that both from the POV of a Paludis dev as well as that of a Gentoo dev it's not trivial because it allows for better granularity when selecting subsets of packages. > > 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. Yes, you've been repeating that over and over. At least one example would probably help to understand the point you're trying to make. Best regards, Wulf
pgpBLrPEwT7zD.pgp
Description: PGP signature
