From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD2311381F3 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 10:06:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5707CE0A9B; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 10:06:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6CDB8E09B2 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 10:06:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.33] (117.Red-88-11-52.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net [88.11.52.117]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: pacho) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D058D33DD81 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 10:06:51 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1365934008.6940.12.camel@localhost> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCHES] kernel-2.eclass: Various changes requested by users. + [STABLEREQ?] sys-kernel/gentoo-sources-3.8.7: Any objections against stabilizing? From: Pacho Ramos To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:06:48 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20130414040854.7f672faa@caribou.gateway.2wire.net> References: <20130412234105.407563f4@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20130414085539.7501576a@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20130414022418.45e1ed85@caribou.gateway.2wire.net> <201304141023.05880.dilfridge@gentoo.org> <20130414040854.7f672faa@caribou.gateway.2wire.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.8.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: 9694a092-604e-411b-ba06-cd5cfbfd4c58 X-Archives-Hash: 3f3e280119a78ef17cfa97ba0ebf6268 El dom, 14-04-2013 a las 04:08 -0600, Ryan Hill escribió: > On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 10:23:00 +0200 > "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > > > Am Sonntag, 14. April 2013, 10:24:18 schrieb Ryan Hill: > > > > > > Personally I think that the entire idea of only displaying messages on the > > > first install is completely asinine. What exactly is the benefit? Were > > > users complaining that we were being too helpful and they'd like us to > > > hide important messages in random places? > > > > No. They are just not reading it when the only new and relevant message is > > drowned in repetitive spam. > > So the solution is to not display them at all? New messages won't be printed > unless the maintainer uses REPLACING_VERSIONS, in which case you get exactly > the same behaviour as now, ie. "drowned in repetitive spam". All this does is > reduce the chance of the user ever seeing important information. If they > happen to miss it the first time they're SOL. Are cosmetics really a bigger > concern than keeping users informed? > > The messages are shown the first time by elog *and* saved in /usr/share/doc/*/README.gentoo, adding the advantage of users having that docs always present without needing to re-emerge the package or manually read ebuilds