-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 04/06/2011 12:52 PM, Michael Foord wrote: > On 6 April 2011 17:44, P.J. Eby <p...@telecommunity.com> wrote: > >> At 02:13 AM 4/6/2011 -0400, Terry Reedy wrote: >> >>> No, he countered with a community poll that has, as I remember, 100-200 >>> responders. After a contentious discussion. >>> >> >> A poll which, unfortunately, had numerous choices about what *kind* of >> system to have, such that votes *against* Martin's proposal were widely >> split, and IIRC, the difference between the number of votes cast for >> different alternatives was pretty negligible. >> >> Looking at the numbers at one point, I concluded that if I had run a poll >> with those results, I would have had to conclude that there was essentially >> zero consensus about what direction should be taken, and either tabled the >> notion or gone back to the list to try to get more specific discussion. >> >> Unfortunately, the poll was run as a decision-making mechanism, rather than >> an information-gathering one. >> >> > > Well sure, but it still didn't show that *nobody* wants ratings which is > what people in this thread seem to be claiming. > > I'm afraid that those in this thread, and with all respect to Jacob those > who respond to him on twitter, *do* represent a vocal minority primarily of > package authors and are not in any way representative of users of pypi. A > poll may be flawed however it is done, but is a much better mechanism. > > Martin *has* offered to do another poll, an offer that has been ignored.
For those who may not be familiar with the prior poll, here are the results reported to the list[1]: - ----------------------------------- %< -------------------------------- Allow ratings and comments on all packages (status quo) 237 Allow package owners to disallow comments (ratings unmodified). 139 Allow comments, but only send them to package owners (ratings unmodified). 33 Disallow comments (ratings unmodified). 24 Disallow ratings and comments (status three months ago). 88 - ----------------------------------- %< -------------------------------- Interpretation of those results was the subject of a huge thread, which produced no clear consensus (at least to me). [1] http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.catalog/2169 Tres. - -- =================================================================== Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk2cocQACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ5rcQCgqA1G5mw21Zvz++iMM3vc63i0 McwAoLz3aKjZ5bEg07xAcBwhHC8irMjz =caM8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Catalog-SIG mailing list Catalog-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
