[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnumed-devel] GnuMed documentation (Was: GNUmed 1.1.9 Maintenance R

From: Sebastian Hilbert
Subject: Re: [Gnumed-devel] GnuMed documentation (Was: GNUmed 1.1.9 Maintenance Release)
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 07:44:48 +0100
User-agent: KMail/1.13.6 (Linux/2.6.38-13-generic-pae; KDE/4.6.5; i686; ; )

On Thursday, January 12, 2012 10:58:40 PM Andreas Tille wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 09:20:31PM +0100, Sebastian Hilbert wrote:

> > Dropping is not a good idea as there are people who do not have cheap and

> > reliable internet connection.


> Well, lets speak about numbers:




> Please be not fooled by the number of installations but consider the

> number for "vote" (the number of people who use this package regularly).

> You might probably know all these seven users and can ask them

> personally about their internet connection. So yes, the documentation

> packages exist for the very reason you were giving in theory. However,

> in practice of this actual case gnumed-doc it's actually not that much

> to download even through a modem. Moreover if you ask me: The current

> quality of the local documentation does not make a good user experience

> - I would not like to point users to this, thought.


You have a point here with regards to Debian users. Here are some figures for the Ubuntu users

gnumed-doc 2485 28 2180 21 256 (Debian-med Packaging Team)

So now there are 35 users to ask :-) and the ones who download from the Ubuntu PPA which are not counted (milions most likely ...)

> > Thanks for checking this stuff. I will see what I can do.

> >

> > Oh and by the way. the uglyness is reduced when we will export to html

> > with skin plain (I have tested this)


> There are two options of handling for me:


> 1. Dropping gnumed-doc (at least for the next couple of releases -

> it would make extra manual work for ftpmaster to remove a package

> just to add it again next week or so).

I don't object to dropping it but one could say. If noone is looking at it anyway why drop it. Instead it is help for this one person who does not have any other means to access the docs (e.g.) wiki. This person might think. Shoot this is ugly and broken but it is there. Plus I am going to fix it anyhow. It has been like this for the last couple of releases. I fail to see why we would start seeing this as a roadblock all of a sudden.

> 2. Waiting for the next release(s) until you fixed the docu to an

> acceptable state (regarding a good user experience).


You decide. I will make sure the links work and the plain skin is used. As soon as this is in place it is considered not to get any better from my point of view.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]