[aur-general] Package voting alternatives

[Ray Rashif]

> Perhaps the fix for that
> is to reset the votes on all packages every 6 months or something?

That's not good. If users forget to vote, the stats are of no use.
After 6 months, the only number still updating and voting may just be
1/10.

> Offer
> 3 "vote options" like: "Great package." "Meh." "Rubbish." and that'll likely
> give the best idea of package usage/quality.

Packages should be judged by what kind of software they
contain/provide, not "packaging quality". The purpose is to get
popular/useful software to the user, regardless of the quality of the
packaging itself. Even if it's a bad package but of good software,
more votes will make sure that it gets noticed and the right person
maintains it.

Often times, and this I can only guess, someone may be annoyed by a
failed/bad build and would refrain from voting just because of that.

The solution to this is to educate ourselves :)

> If you like a package, you'll probably update it regularly.

Also not a very good assumption. Remember that a lot of users run an
AUR client, so updates happen whether or not they like it (as long as
they have it installed).

/endquotes

The current mechanism works fine, except for the "package quality vs
software quality" thing.


-- 
GPG/PGP ID: B42DDCAD