[aur-general] Remove ardour3-svn

[Allan McRae]

On 21/12/10 18:52, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Dec 2010 16:08:03 +1000
> Allan McRae<allan at archlinux.org>  wrote:
>
>> On 21/12/10 15:53, Xyne wrote:
>>> On 2010-12-21 12:14 +0800 (51:2)
>>> Ng Oon-Ee wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 13:22 +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
>>>>> My view is that there is no need for informational post_install or
>>>>> post_update messages (and I find those annoying in general...).
>>>>> Especially given this obviously a svn snapshot for a branch that
>>>>> has seen no release yet.  I work on the assumption that the users
>>>>> of Arch are not stupid[*] and know what they are installing on
>>>>> their systems. They would have gone out of their way not to just
>>>>> install the ardour package from the repos for a reason.
>>>>>
>>>>> [*] well, lets just say I do to make this point...  :P
>>>>>
>>>>> Allan
>>>>
>>>> Well from the POV of ardour's developers, ardour3 isn't even alpha
>>>> or pre-alpha yet, and this PKGBUILD just encourages those mythical
>>>> 'stupid users' to try out something which isn't for general users
>>>> yet.
>>>>
>>>> The problem here is that problems will be brought to them (the
>>>> ardour devs) rather than to this list or the comments on the AUR
>>>> package. If a post_install message alleviates that problem it's
>>>> all good, I think.
>>>>
>>>
>>> If a simple message is able to address the concerns expressed by
>>> the upstream developer and encourage users to contribute to the
>>> project then we should include it. It shows respect and costs
>>> nothing.
>>
>> How about a comment in the PKGBUILD then?  Everybody reads the
>> PKGBUILD before blindly running makepkg, right...
>>
>> Too many people ignore post_install/upgrade messages as it is because
>> of all the "useless" information in them.  I think there usage should
>> be limited to absolutely critical information.
>>
>> Allan
>
> many people ignore those messages?  that's silly. the solution for
> preventing users ignoring reading warnings is not removing the warnings.
> anyway, if you make it a warning - even if they ignore it - they will
> *also* see it when they read the pkgbuild source.

No. The solution is not to warn the user for unimportant things so they 
do not become desensitised to output from pacman.

> PS: didn't you just say "I work on the assumption that the users of Arch
> are not stupid" ?

I did follow that with an asterisk...

Allan