> I think if gump were a little less verbose it would be a good
addition,
> personally. Maybe the whole gump result set as one entry would work
> better. I like the *idea* of it being there, the initial practice of
it
> was just... verbose =)
And some of the human bloggers weren't verbose? ;-)
I've tried to trim the algorythm as best I could, it only posts the first
time a change of state occurs (the first failure, the first success),
however we did have a little flurry of those. Somebody fixed something which
meant a bunch new projects sprang back to health. Maybe I can trim it
further by not posting if something goes into 'pre-requisite failure' or
comes back to health from 'pre-requisite failure', i.e. only when projects
affect their own changes.
That said, throttling the verbose folks seems a general problem w/ this form
of aggregation. I've seen (gut feel) a reasonable increase in postings from
folks since this new forum of syndication was published. I think this effect
of PlanetApache has been to change "I'm posting this for me, and for
whomever wishes to listen to me" to "I'm posting this for me, and all those
folks reading that page...". I don't think Gump was so affected, but the
humans appear to have been. Who throttles them? ;-)
regards,
Adam
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
