Re: Missing package documentation reminder

Helgi Þormar wrote: > Is this a joke ? I mean really ? > Aren't we sending out enough global emails as it is ? > > At least I remember when I made the whole "send out bug report reminders" > then I almost got teared a new one. > > Will these emails be sent out monthly or ? > > Btw. it's "stupid" to say a package is useless without docs because that's > simply false information :) even tho only the devs will see these > emails, especially when the package is marked as beta, if those emails are > going to be sent out then please do so only on stable package where I'm > actually listed ... Use the database, not an outdated package.xml file (it > even seems a bit of wasted cycles to use the package xml because we have a > DB for this stuff) > > Even a better idea is to send these emails out only on maintained > packages ( > i.e. not marked as unmaintained or deprecated) > > Just my 2 cents, might have missed siome discussion about this since I only > look at the lists ever so often but so it goes, I got rather curde internet > access at work so I can't really look it up. Hi Helgi and all, I think we need to rephrase to "a package is not considered up to the quality standards of PEAR unless it has end-user documentation" "Useless" is too inflammatory to have the desired effect. I think all deprecated packages need a 1-page manual entry that links to the docs for the new package, just as packages like phpdocumentor need a 1-page entry linking to external docs. Perhaps the reminder email could suggest this as well. As for the email being useless, I think the fact that there was a reply on pear-dev from a developer I've never heard of before asking how to write docs completely refutes your argument :) Greg