Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 20:34:12 +0200 From: Gerhard Sittig <Gerhard.Sittig@gmx.net> To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: make world failed Message-ID: <20000404203411.B23851@speedy.gsinet> In-Reply-To: <20000404001130.A83840@enigma.redbrick.dcu.ie>; from drjolt@redbrick.dcu.ie on Tue, Apr 04, 2000 at 12:11:30AM %2B0000 References: <Pine.BSF.4.10.10004031529120.36725-100000@home.offwhite.net> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0004031348070.2849-100000@dt051n0b.san.rr.com> <20000404001130.A83840@enigma.redbrick.dcu.ie>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[ Just in case disclaimers like these are needed: The message is
_not_ a personal response but an article meant for the list.
It's just a reply to some points I came across when reading the
thread. And: English is not my native language. Please keep
this in mind when you feel I'm telling absolute BS by using the
wrong words for what I want to express :) EOD ]
On Tue, Apr 04, 2000 at 00:11 +0000, David Murphy wrote:
>
> At the end of the day, if someone wants to write documentation,
> they will. If they don't, they won't. In your model, the person
> who needs documentation is assigned the task of writing
> documentation.
I guess one has to use a slightly different wording:
The ones able to contribute code have limited resources only just
like anyone else has. That's why they focus at what they're good
at or what's most efficiently done in their available time or
with their resources. That's when documentation automatically
lags behind the code. It's a simple question of priorities.
This is the same for the testers and the documenters and whatever
other service is accompanying the programs (promotion?
presentation?).
What you call "the needy are to help themselfes" is as follows in
my eyes: The ones consuming others' work get what they pay for.
If they don't pay anything, they won't get anything. If they pay
a small amount for media, they will just get some. If they pay a
consultant or teach their workers, they get skilled support.
But it's not all about money in itself. If one spends some time
to harvest the _available_ information, one can help oneself.
It's there, maybe it's just not presented on a golden platter.
And now for the contribution: The ones saying "(Now) I know
better" are welcomed to show so by improving what obviously(?)
lacks something. Patches are more helpful than just stating
"something's wrong".
And who else should be able to provide user friendly doc if not
the ones with
- the idea what they think is wrong
- the knowledge how to get around the problem or how to do better
- and (IMO most important) the idea what they had expected to
find in terms of readable and helpful information
Doc provided by the source authors often has the status of being
unuseful or complicated to users unfamiliar with the system at
all. Do you remember (or can you imagine) the reaction on
directing a newbie to the manpages? The info *is* there -- the
new user just cannot handle it. But who else could improve it if
not the one being unhappy with it. Nobody else knows exactly
what's the problem!
> There seem to be two widely held opinions on this list, and I
> assume, perhaps incorrectly, that they are held by the majority
> of FreeBSD developers:
>
> 1) The responsibility for locating available documentation
> rests with the user.
Of course. Either the user does research on his own or he pays
someone to do so for him (in whatever currency or material or
moral compensation). Do you know any other form that works? Are
you stopped in the street by passengers telling you how to use a
certain software? Or do you have to go _somewhere_ _appropriate_
and learn it yourself, maybe with the help of others? How is
free software different in this respect from comercial software?
Do you get a consultant contract when bying a Windows package
(just to name _one_, not meant representative in any way) or do
you have to search MS' website and/or get the resource kit and/or
scan the archives/KB/xDK and/or employ an admin yourself? BTW
you're always free to bundle the software purchase and a suitable
support contract -- just as it is possible with FreeBSD, too.
> 2) If the user finds the available documentation insufficient,
> the responsibility for creating sufficient documentation rests
> with the user.
If somebody knows how to do better, he's always free to keep this
knowledge for himself. But if he wants to pay back for what he
gets from others, he can contribute to the common product and
have others share the gain this will give. Where else should
progress come from when everybody points to others to do
something?
> There are, broadly speaking, two classes of users of any
> software system: those who use the system, find problems with
> the system, and fix those problems; and those who use the
> system, find problems with the system, and report those
> problems. I think of the former group of people as
> "developers", and I call the latter group of people "users".
If the latter do consume only, they're mere consumers. In this
position they have to take what they get. And they get what they
pay for. It's as simple as that.
Of course stating "there's something I don't like" will cause
other reactions than "here is how to improve something". This
should not be hard to understand. BTW is "I contribute to an
existing base" more efficient than "I try to do better on my
own". Duplicate effort eats resources which could have been used
for building something new instead of just having something
twice.
To repeat it once more: One doesn't have to be a programmer to
contribute to a software project. It's sufficient to have
knowledge and skills in _some_ field and free resources for using
them in the project's interest. The handbook should have plenty
of pointers where to go to when one feels like participating.
virtually yours 82D1 9B9C 01DC 4FB4 D7B4 61BE 3F49 4F77 72DE DA76
Gerhard Sittig true | mail -s "get gpg key" Gerhard.Sittig@gmx.net
--
If you don't understand or are scared by any of the above
ask your parents or an adult to help you.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000404203411.B23851>