Bug#150551: ITP: wmcoincoin -- Stupid dockapp for browsing DaCode sites news and board
On Fri, 2002-06-21 at 18:55, Joseph Carter wrote: [...] another containing a few gigabytes of porn, I, for one, would like to state that this could be a very useful package, particularly if the package is of ... good proportions ;-) Now back to your regularly scheduled flamefest! signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#150551: ITP: wmcoincoin -- Stupid dockapp for browsing DaCode sites news and board
Le sam 22/06/2002 à 00:30, Joseph Carter a écrit : And this has what exactly to do with wmcoincoin though? We're talking about a self-described stupid dockapp whose primary feature seems to be the added convenience of one-click trolling on a particular website. The thing is someone's idea of a joke, and while I'm sure users of that website think it's rather amusing, the rest of the world doesn't see the humour. Did you really read the description of the package, or just the first line ? You're describing version 1.0 of wmcoincoin, which had only one feature : the red button. Now, we are at version 2.3.8, and the changes between versions don't concern the colour of the button. All the features having stupid names doesn't mean they are useful. The troll-o-meter and the plopificator really improve your chatting comfort, and you won't find an IRC client having such features. Yes, this tool is designed for trolling. But don't you often use tools designed for trolling, such as IRC or newsgroups clients ? -- .''`. Josselin Mouette/\./\ : :' : [EMAIL PROTECTED] `. `'[EMAIL PROTECTED] `- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#150551: ITP: wmcoincoin -- Stupid dockapp for browsing DaCode sites news and board
On Sat, Jun 22, 2002 at 02:07:44PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: All the features having stupid names doesn't mean they are useful. The troll-o-meter and the plopificator really improve your chatting comfort, and you won't find an IRC client having such features. You'd be surprised what I've seen in IRC clients... Yes, this tool is designed for trolling. But don't you often use tools designed for trolling, such as IRC or newsgroups clients ? This is the key point - a tool designed for trolling with a very small audience. I don't really think the package fits into Debian. I think you are trying to legitimise something which most people consider to be wrong/annoying by making the claim that any generally open forum is designed to be trolled. Quite simply, this is not the case. And while this is really tangental to the larger discussion of useless crap in Debian, I do think that a package designed specifically for trolling has no place in Debian. Putting the package in Debian can and will be taken by others as an endorsement by Debian of the software. It will also be seen as an endorsement of the software's intended use. While I'm all for Debian taking a stand on certain controversial issues and distributing the software which helps people exercise their rights, I'm can't say your right to troll a website with an open forum is high on my list of controversial issues I'd like to see Debian support. Now before the next idiot jumps in and starts using the word censorship, I will beat them to it. Do I want to see some form of censorship applied to the packages in Debian? ABSOLUTELY! I want each and every developer, before he packages something, to consider the impact of the package. And by impact I mean to the people who use it, to the people who wouldn't use it (and who maybe would rather nobody used it), and to the project's reputation as a whole. These questions are too big for anyone to answer arbitrarily for a particular piece of software, but as Debian developers we have the obligation to answer them for our own packages. If after doing that, a developer decides the package should be in Debian, then my opinion doesn't matter a whole lot. I'll agree with the decision or not, but at that point it's out of my hands - note in the recent winex discussion I was not in favor of putting winex in Debian, even if I did want to see Transgaming's hand forced on the whole license mess. I've supported other controversial packages before, though. -- Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED]Certified free software nut Feb 5 13:27:01 trinity lp0 on fire -- the Linux kernel, warning that the printer was out of ink pgpbTrMDokSwg.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#150551: ITP: wmcoincoin -- Stupid dockapp for browsing DaCode sites news and board
Josselin Mouette writes: This is the key point - a tool designed for trolling with a very small audience. I don't really think the package fits into Debian. Why do you think it has such a small audience ? WMcoincoin is already used by 10-15 % of the linuxfr.org regular users, which has nothing to do with the 30 users of your estimations. It was my estimation. Where did you get your statistics? I don't think so many people use wmcoincoin, it's mainly used by board addicts, and these users represent a small part of the whole site audience. Now if you count how many of these users use Debian... And DaCode is also becoming more widely used, as it is faster and more secure than PHPNuke. I have heard on this list of a potential migration of debianplanet to DaCode. Will this software still look so unuseful to you when you have use for it ? It will make more sense, sure. I still think that wmcoincoin doesn't deserve the time you'll spend to package it, but if you're willing to do it, go ahead. Totally your decision. Romain ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -- Romain FRANCOISE [EMAIL PROTECTED] | That there, that's not me. I it's a miracle -- http://orebokech.com/ | go where I please. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#150551: ITP: wmcoincoin -- Stupid dockapp for browsing DaCode sites news and board
Romain FRANCOISE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why do you think it has such a small audience ? WMcoincoin is already used by 10-15 % of the linuxfr.org regular users, which has nothing to do with the 30 users of your estimations. It was my estimation. Where did you get your statistics? Here I guess : http://linuxfr.org/stats/usage_200205.php3#TOPAGENTS Unfortunately it's not based on the number of unique visitors, but on the total number of viewed pages. (AFAICT) The former would be far more interesting and accurate. JB. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#150551: ITP: wmcoincoin -- Stupid dockapp for browsing DaCode sites news and board
Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 01:15:16AM +0200, Aaron Isotton wrote: I care. I suspect everyone who has to download the Packages.gz for sid on a slow link probably has a vested interest in removing the stupid and all but totally unused crap people throw in the archive, not adding more to it. I appreciate the variety. I'd be much more interested in a better compression algorithm (bz2, for example) than in a censored content. It's not about censorship (why the hell do people always insist on making any objection to a package an argument about censorship anyway?) It *is* about censorship. What you are saying is remove the packages which *I* don't think have a 'real use', or which *I* don't think have enough users. In my eyes, that's censorship and nothing else. BTW, how are you going to remove the useless packages? Do you really think that anybody saying I am the boss here, and I decide what goes into Debian and what doesn't. Your package is useless. Your work sucks. Fuck off. will improve the general quality of Debian and the collaboration between the developers? bzip2 was packaged because someone thought it would be a useful thing to have in Debian. And it is, lots of people use it. We're not trying to keep useful things out of the distribution. However, I'm not convinced this thing is actually useful for any real purpose. As Anthony pointed out, I was saying something completely different. Using Packages.bz2 instead of Packages.gz would save 23%, which is probably more than you'd ever obtain by eliminating so-called useless packages. We have some really silly things in the archive, and that's fine as long as they actually have a real use. But I don't go packaging every little applet and script I write, because most of it is useful to six people, some of it closer to about a dozen. Please define real use. Use your brain! That's what you've got it for. I'm asking for people to apply a little common sense. I realize this is a lot to ask from people, especially in this project, but it's the only way to prevent more and more useless crap from filling the archives, making Debian CDs cost more, and slowing down the release process while people try to fix silly bugs in packages that nobody uses, rather than worrying about the not so silly bugs in packages people do use. Debian is made by volunteers. They fix what they want, when they want and only if they want. You cannot force anybody to accept your priorities as his own. When packaging a thing, a developer should be asking what this package will add to Debian and who will benefit. If the answers are not much and nobody really, do we really need to further bloat the Packages list, the archive space, the mirrors' disk requirements, etc, with it? I say probably not. Only do what's popular has lead to Windows. I prefer Debian the way it is. Again, you're dodging the issue. Not at all. What you are saying is to package only what is popular and what has real use. (Not defining what popular and real use means, of course.) Doing only what's popular and used/liked by most has lead to Windows XP. I, and many others, prefer a bloated Packages.gz because if we want some applications only few others are using, we must accept that other people will want some other applications only few are using. Or, in other words: if I want to have that program with no real use to you in Debian, I have to accept another package with no real use to me. If the software is only useful to a small handful of people, then those people should have the software. If it's useful outside that small group, it probably fits well in Debian. However, it's not our job to serve as the central repository for every single coder's joke program, CS homework assignment, porn collection, or anything else that someone, somewhere wants - even if they are the only person in the world who does. What is a small handful? 5? 10? 50? How do you know how many people will actually use a program? If it takes an hour to package a program, and 10 people install it, are these 10 saved hours worth less than a tenth of a second of download time of Packages.gz? If you cannot apply common sense to the question should we have this package?, then I can't help you. Define common sense. What *you* think, maybe? -- Aaron Isotton http://www.isotton.com/ My GPG Public Key: http://www.isotton.com/gpg-public-key -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#150551: ITP: wmcoincoin -- Stupid dockapp for browsing DaCode sites news and board
On Thu, 2002-06-20 at 20:43, Joseph Carter wrote: bzip2 was packaged because someone thought it would be a useful thing to have in Debian. You have greatly misunderstood the person you are replying to. He suggested that Packages.bz2 would help (instead of Packages.gz). So, here are stats from sid, free, i386. Packages.gz file downloaded from ftp://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/dists/sid/main/binary-i386/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]:pkgz$ ls -l total 10604 -rw-r--r--1 anthony anthony 7341811 Jun 21 07:42 Packages -rw-r--r--1 anthony anthony 1519174 Jun 21 07:42 Packages.bz2 -rw-r--r--1 anthony anthony 1970466 Jun 20 15:08 Packages.gz So, using bzip2 -9 over gzip -9 seems to save a good 23%; quite nice, actually. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#150551: ITP: wmcoincoin -- Stupid dockapp for browsing DaCode sites news and board
On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 07:46:35AM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: bzip2 was packaged because someone thought it would be a useful thing to have in Debian. You have greatly misunderstood the person you are replying to. He suggested that Packages.bz2 would help (instead of Packages.gz). So, here are stats from sid, free, i386. Packages.gz file downloaded from ftp://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/dists/sid/main/binary-i386/ And this has what exactly to do with wmcoincoin though? We're talking about a self-described stupid dockapp whose primary feature seems to be the added convenience of one-click trolling on a particular website. The thing is someone's idea of a joke, and while I'm sure users of that website think it's rather amusing, the rest of the world doesn't see the humour. I've long been a supporter of bzip2 packages files and packages themselves because they're useful. But compressing the packages files with a better compression program doesn't mean we have an excuse to put basically useless crap in the archive because someone thinks it's funny to put it there. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:pkgz$ ls -l total 10604 -rw-r--r--1 anthony anthony 7341811 Jun 21 07:42 Packages -rw-r--r--1 anthony anthony 1519174 Jun 21 07:42 Packages.bz2 -rw-r--r--1 anthony anthony 1970466 Jun 20 15:08 Packages.gz So, using bzip2 -9 over gzip -9 seems to save a good 23%; quite nice, actually. Yeah, and we _should_ be using this. We're not, but we _should_ be. You don't have to convince me, I've seen these results before. -- Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] You're entitled to my opinion Knghtbrd JHM: I'm not putting quake in the kernel source Knghtbrd but we should put quake in the boot floppies to one-up Caldera's tetris game.. ; pgpbNx1mW0PHn.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#150551: ITP: wmcoincoin -- Stupid dockapp for browsing DaCode sites news and board
On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 02:36:12PM +0200, Aaron Isotton wrote: It's not about censorship (why the hell do people always insist on making any objection to a package an argument about censorship anyway?) It *is* about censorship. What you are saying is remove the packages which *I* don't think have a 'real use', or which *I* don't think have enough users. In my eyes, that's censorship and nothing else. You are acting like a moron. The dockapp in question is self-described as stupid. It is admittedly a JOKE written by its author and is not intended to be a serious applet. It does not provide any features which have any actual value, even in the eyes of the things author. It's a JOKE, and a bad one. The fact that someone thinks it's worthwhile to put this in Debian is nice, and clearly I don't have the authority to say that he can't do it. But I do ask for application of common sense when packaging things, which it seems you are incapible of doing. This is not my problem. If you want to bloat the archive with this, a similar applet which posts messages about Natalie Portman's hot grits to Slashdot, another containing a few gigabytes of porn, or anything else for that matter, there's absolutely no way I can prevent you from doing so, other than appealing to your common sense that these things do not really belong in Debian. Since this has clearly failed, so far as I can tell due to a complete lack of any such common sense to appeal to, do as you like. Just don't come crying to me the next time someone hands out 100 free Mandrake CDs because 100 sets of Debian CDs would have been too expensive at an installfest. (Hey, I've watched it happen a few times before, and the Debian people always bellyache that nobody was giving away Debian sets, which take too many CDs for the vendors to donate a whole pile of them for giving away..) BTW, how are you going to remove the useless packages? Do you really think that anybody saying I am the boss here, and I decide what goes into Debian and what doesn't. Your package is useless. Your work sucks. Fuck off. will improve the general quality of Debian and the collaboration between the developers? What the fuck are you smoking? Useless packages should be removed by their maintainers because they are no longer useful. I realize that's too much to ask for from this project, but that is what should happen. bzip2 was packaged because someone thought it would be a useful thing to have in Debian. And it is, lots of people use it. We're not trying to keep useful things out of the distribution. However, I'm not convinced this thing is actually useful for any real purpose. As Anthony pointed out, I was saying something completely different. Using Packages.bz2 instead of Packages.gz would save 23%, which is probably more than you'd ever obtain by eliminating so-called useless packages. I don't know, there are a lot of packages in the archive which are neither maintained nor used (widely or otherwise), some of which are not even installed on more than a few machines according to popcon. Removing these would be a good start toward warding off archive bloat. Please define real use. Use your brain! That's what you've got it for. I'm asking for people to apply a little common sense. I realize this is a lot to ask from people, especially in this project, but it's the only way to prevent more and more useless crap from filling the archives, making Debian CDs cost more, and slowing down the release process while people try to fix silly bugs in packages that nobody uses, rather than worrying about the not so silly bugs in packages people do use. Debian is made by volunteers. They fix what they want, when they want and only if they want. You cannot force anybody to accept your priorities as his own. And when a thing that was packaged is no longer useful to the person who packaged it, or anybody else who might take it over? How many packages do we have up for adoption or outright orphaned? Many of these are useful things, many are not really used by anyone now. Several of these haven't even seen a recompile since potato, and some of them even since before that. Again, you're dodging the issue. Not at all. What you are saying is to package only what is popular and what has real use. (Not defining what popular and real use means, of course.) Doing only what's popular and used/liked by most has lead to Windows XP. I, and many others, prefer a bloated Packages.gz because if we want some applications only few others are using, we must accept that other people will want some other applications only few are using. Or, in other words: if I want to have that program with no real use to you in Debian, I have to accept another package with no real use to me. Popularity has little to do with it. There are certainly applications which have a small target audience. When the target audience is totally
Bug#150551: ITP: wmcoincoin -- Stupid dockapp for browsing DaCode sites news and board
On Fri, 2002-06-21 at 18:30, Joseph Carter wrote: And this has what exactly to do with wmcoincoin though? Absolutely nothing. However, it does have something to do with the larger discussion of what to do about bloated packages files. The thing is someone's idea of a joke, and while I'm sure users of that website think it's rather amusing, the rest of the world doesn't see the humour. There is plenty of precedent for this... apt-cache show vigor apt-cache show asr-manpages apt-cache show funny-manpages apt-cache show libhtml-munger-perl apt-cache show filters apt-cache show kodo apt-cache show xodo apt-cache show gcpegg I'm sure there are many more; that was just a quick recolection and a apt-cache search or two. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#150551: ITP: wmcoincoin -- Stupid dockapp for browsing DaCode sites news and board
On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 09:08:52PM -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote: The thing is someone's idea of a joke, and while I'm sure users of that website think it's rather amusing, the rest of the world doesn't see the humour. There is plenty of precedent for this... [..] I'm sure there are many more; that was just a quick recolection and a apt-cache search or two. Just because a silly thing has been done in the past does not mean that we should keep doing it. -- Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Goldfish don't bounce * Knghtktty is not going to ask how zucchini got into the discussion ... pgpHKsoxLS5a9.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#150551: ITP: wmcoincoin -- Stupid dockapp for browsing DaCode sites news and board
Package: wnpp Version: N/A; reported 2002-06-20 Severity: wishlist * Package name: wmcoincoin Version : 2.3.8b Upstream Author : Julien Pommier [EMAIL PROTECTED] * URL : http://hules.free.fr/wmcoincoin/ * License : GPL v2 Description : Stupid dockapp for browsing DaCode sites news and board WMCoinCoin allows you to browse linuxfr.org, and any other site based on DaCode 1.2+. Warning: it is currently only in French ! Its main functionality is a red button allowing to post coin ! coin ! on the board. It also features: * display of the title and contents of the news; * an integrated, high-end trollometer, measuring the troll level of the messages on the board; * a real trolloscope, similar to the one that equips the Chinese secret services; * help balloons; * statistics about the people using the board; * the Palmipède Editor, allowing to post other things than coin ! coin !; * a flamophone function, warning you when being flamed; * the Pinnipède Teletype, a decision-maker tool; * a professional plopificator with its boitakon(tm), when you don't want to read some trolls; * Clippy, always making appropriate suggestions of stupid things to say when you hesitate. The software is currently not internationalized and only supports the French language. Some translations of the advanced functions may be difficult, so don't hesitate to contact the upstram authors if you want to help them. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#150551: ITP: wmcoincoin -- Stupid dockapp for browsing DaCode sites news and board
Josselin Mouette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Description : Stupid dockapp for browsing DaCode sites news and board WMCoinCoin allows you to browse linuxfr.org, and any other site based on DaCode 1.2+. Warning: it is currently only in French ! I don't see the point in having this software included in Debian. The interest of wmcoincoin is _very_ limited outside of the linuxfr.org users community, not to say inexistent. It's sort of a private joke, and nothing more... Moreover it's not internationalized, and I think it will kind of difficult to translate some parts of the software ; most of our users won't understand what this is about. Add to this that the code is crap and is likely to break very easily. DaCode doesn't seem to be very used (compared to PHP/PostNuke for instance), maybe packaging it would be more useful :) No, really, I can't see the point here. Please enlighten me. JB. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#150551: ITP: wmcoincoin -- Stupid dockapp for browsing DaCode sites news and board
Le jeu 20/06/2002 à 17:53, Julien BLACHE a écrit : WMCoinCoin allows you to browse linuxfr.org, and any other site based on DaCode 1.2+. Warning: it is currently only in French ! I don't see the point in having this software included in Debian. The interest of wmcoincoin is _very_ limited outside of the linuxfr.org users community, not to say inexistent. It's sort of a private joke, and nothing more... I wouldn't say that. WMcoincoin is full of features unuseful to many people, but it is also very good as simply showing the news and the activity on the board. Having an ugly code and a lot of private jokes doesn't mean it is not powerful and well maintained upstream. Moreover it's not internationalized, and I think it will kind of difficult to translate some parts of the software ; most of our users won't understand what this is about. Add to this that the code is crap and is likely to break very easily. The i18n question is more important, that's why I first asked on debian-mentors if this software is worth packaging. DaCode doesn't seem to be very used (compared to PHP/PostNuke for instance), maybe packaging it would be more useful :) See #145985, packaging is in progress, and by people much more competent than me for PHP stuff. Also, you can see (or you will see when the website is up again) at http://dev.dacode.org/dacode-list.txt that linuxfr.org is not alone, even if it is certainly the more important site using it. I don't know myself if it is a good or a bad thing to put this software in the archive. I expected flam^H^H^H^Ha debate, here it is. There are a lot of packages in the archive that are being used by far less people than those who use wmcoincoin. The question is « what do we want ? » -- .''`. Josselin Mouette/\./\ : :' : [EMAIL PROTECTED] `. `'[EMAIL PROTECTED] `- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#150551: ITP: wmcoincoin -- Stupid dockapp for browsing DaCode sites news and board
Josselin Mouette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The interest of wmcoincoin is _very_ limited outside of the linuxfr.org users community, not to say inexistent. It's sort of a private joke, and nothing more... I wouldn't say that. WMcoincoin is full of features unuseful to many people, but it is also very good as simply showing the news and the So maybe you should advertise this feature more than the Coincoin button. The description as written in the ITP is (IMHO) more aimed at promoting the stupid features of wmcoincoin than the useful ones. activity on the board. Having an ugly code and a lot of private jokes doesn't mean it is not powerful and well maintained upstream. One could argue that if it were to be well maintained, the code wouldn't be that ugly. Moreover it's not internationalized, and I think it will kind of difficult to translate some parts of the software ; most of our users won't understand what this is about. Add to this that the code is crap and is likely to break very easily. The i18n question is more important, that's why I first asked on debian-mentors if this software is worth packaging. Sorry, I received the thread on -mentors only a few minutes ago. DaCode doesn't seem to be very used (compared to PHP/PostNuke for instance), maybe packaging it would be more useful :) See #145985, packaging is in progress, and by people much more competent than me for PHP stuff. Great ! Also, you can see (or you will see when the website is up again) at http://dev.dacode.org/dacode-list.txt that linuxfr.org is not alone, even if it is certainly the more important site using it. I know they're not alone, but they're the biggest one I believe. I don't know myself if it is a good or a bad thing to put this software in the archive. I expected flam^H^H^H^Ha debate, here it is. There are a lot of packages in the archive that are being used by far less people than those who use wmcoincoin. The question is « what do we want ? » Well, I guess we want to avoid cluttering the Packages file more than it already is. But I do not have The Answer. JB. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#150551: ITP: wmcoincoin -- Stupid dockapp for browsing DaCode sites news and board
Julien BLACHE writes: I don't see the point in having this software included in Debian. I'll second that. As the description says, it's just a stupid dockapp and the user base doesn't exceed 30 people, I think. Packaging this is a waste of time. DaCode doesn't seem to be very used (compared to PHP/PostNuke for instance), maybe packaging it would be more useful :) Benjamin Drieu (Cc'ed) is working on a package at the moment, it should be ready some time soon, hopefully. Romain -- Romain FRANCOISE [EMAIL PROTECTED] | I just thought I'd go out it's a miracle -- http://orebokech.com/ | with a little bit more style. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#150551: ITP: wmcoincoin -- Stupid dockapp for browsing DaCode sites news and board
On Thu, Jun 20, 2002, Romain FRANCOISE wrote: I don't see the point in having this software included in Debian. I'll second that. As the description says, it's just a stupid dockapp and the user base doesn't exceed 30 people, I think. Packaging this is a waste of time. So what? This is at least 30 times the minimal required userbase for having something packaged for Debian. Definitely worth it. -- Sam. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#150551: ITP: wmcoincoin -- Stupid dockapp for browsing DaCode sites news and board
Le jeu 20/06/2002 à 18:38, Romain FRANCOISE a écrit : I'll second that. As the description says, it's just a stupid dockapp and the user base doesn't exceed 30 people, I think. Packaging this is a waste of time. Stop trolling. There are hundreds of packages in the archive that have less users than that, but nobody cares. I guess it is because they are serious applications. But having stupid features and being developed by people having a great sense of humor doesn't make wmcoincoin not serious. It has lots of interesting features, to the point where DaCode and wmcoincoin can bring most of the functionality of an IRC server and client, all over the HTTP protocol, without being a bandwidth hog nor a server killer. With the increasing number of people having only access to a HTTP proxy, it can get a much wider audience. And it has already much more than 30 users. I think the point of Debian is to bring a high quality distribution, bringing alone all software you could want to run. I thought it was now clear that we don't only need serious software but also games, time-wasting applets, and funny dockapps, because people don't only use a computer for working. And I don't think the size of the Packages file is a good excuse. If the Packages.gz system cannot scale a large package number, it has to be adapted to this matter. Discussions on how to achieve this have begun on this list, and the problem will have to be solved sooner or later. As I already said, I don't know if packaging wmcoincoin is a bad or a good idea. But you can't let it out just because it is stupid. -- .''`. Josselin Mouette/\./\ : :' : [EMAIL PROTECTED] `. `'[EMAIL PROTECTED] `- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#150551: ITP: wmcoincoin -- Stupid dockapp for browsing DaCode sites news and board
Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I care. I suspect everyone who has to download the Packages.gz for sid on a slow link probably has a vested interest in removing the stupid and all but totally unused crap people throw in the archive, not adding more to it. I appreciate the variety. I'd be much more interested in a better compression algorithm (bz2, for example) than in a censored content. We have some really silly things in the archive, and that's fine as long as they actually have a real use. But I don't go packaging every little applet and script I write, because most of it is useful to six people, some of it closer to about a dozen. Please define real use. When packaging a thing, a developer should be asking what this package will add to Debian and who will benefit. If the answers are not much and nobody really, do we really need to further bloat the Packages list, the archive space, the mirrors' disk requirements, etc, with it? I say probably not. Only do what's popular has lead to Windows. I prefer Debian the way it is. -- Aaron Isotton http://www.isotton.com/ My GPG Public Key: http://www.isotton.com/gpg-public-key -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#150551: ITP: wmcoincoin -- Stupid dockapp for browsing DaCode sites news and board
On Fri, Jun 21, 2002 at 01:15:16AM +0200, Aaron Isotton wrote: I care. I suspect everyone who has to download the Packages.gz for sid on a slow link probably has a vested interest in removing the stupid and all but totally unused crap people throw in the archive, not adding more to it. I appreciate the variety. I'd be much more interested in a better compression algorithm (bz2, for example) than in a censored content. It's not about censorship (why the hell do people always insist on making any objection to a package an argument about censorship anyway?) bzip2 was packaged because someone thought it would be a useful thing to have in Debian. And it is, lots of people use it. We're not trying to keep useful things out of the distribution. However, I'm not convinced this thing is actually useful for any real purpose. We have some really silly things in the archive, and that's fine as long as they actually have a real use. But I don't go packaging every little applet and script I write, because most of it is useful to six people, some of it closer to about a dozen. Please define real use. Use your brain! That's what you've got it for. I'm asking for people to apply a little common sense. I realize this is a lot to ask from people, especially in this project, but it's the only way to prevent more and more useless crap from filling the archives, making Debian CDs cost more, and slowing down the release process while people try to fix silly bugs in packages that nobody uses, rather than worrying about the not so silly bugs in packages people do use. When packaging a thing, a developer should be asking what this package will add to Debian and who will benefit. If the answers are not much and nobody really, do we really need to further bloat the Packages list, the archive space, the mirrors' disk requirements, etc, with it? I say probably not. Only do what's popular has lead to Windows. I prefer Debian the way it is. Again, you're dodging the issue. If the software is only useful to a small handful of people, then those people should have the software. If it's useful outside that small group, it probably fits well in Debian. However, it's not our job to serve as the central repository for every single coder's joke program, CS homework assignment, porn collection, or anything else that someone, somewhere wants - even if they are the only person in the world who does. If you cannot apply common sense to the question should we have this package?, then I can't help you. -- Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] You're entitled to my opinion rcw dark: caldera? Knghtbrd rcw - that's not a distribution, it's a curse rcw Knghtbrd: it's a cursed distribution pgpko1tgJBe0Q.pgp Description: PGP signature
