At 2:05am -0500 Wed, 10 Nov 2010, Sebastian Spaeth wrote:
+1 for quiet down the icecream advertisment a bit, we should rather put instructions for that in our wiki. If someone configured to use distcc, we should not output icecream related stuff at all. So who comes up with a patch :-)?
My only thought on putting this info in the wiki, as opposed to a minimal mention of it in the output or a related README, is that that begins to have two places of authority. As we're all discovering, the code base is *huge*, and having multiple places to maintain, without a clear jurisdiction of who's "in charge" of each section, and without the most comprehensive of test suites, suggests to me, that having it in a single place where folks are guaranteed to see it, is better. I absolutely agree that the ... "vehemence" of the suggestion should be toned down to something much more subtle, but I think the advertisement's rightful place (in this case) is right where it is, or relatively near there.
In my experience, Wiki's tend to fall victim to the commons, where everyone takes ownership of not taking ownership.
2 cents, Kevin _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
